Center for Biological Diversityhttp://www.desmogblog.com/taxonomy/term/2033/all
enFracking Flowback From California Oil Wells Found To Contain Dangerous Levels Of Carcinogenic and Toxic Chemicalshttp://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/18/fracking-flowback-california-oil-wells-found-contain-dangerous-levels-carcinogenic-and-toxic-chemicals
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_223323229.jpg?itok=_lZEyu5u" width="200" height="140" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Adding to the already lengthy list of reasons to be concerned about the disposal of oil industry wastewater in California, the Center for Biological Diversity says it has found <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2015/fracking-02-11-2015.html" target="_blank">dangerous levels of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals</a> such as benzene and toluene in fracking flowback.<br /><br />
Flowback is a fluid that floats up to the surface of fracked wells that contains clays, dissolved metal ions and total dissolved solids (such as salt) in addition to chemical additives used in the fracking process.<br /><br />
As such, flowback is a component of oil industry wastewater, and one of the chief reasons why the wastewater must be disposed of in a very cautious manner.<br /><br />
In California, where the toxic and cancer-causing chemicals were found to be present in flowback by the <span class="caps">CBD</span>, oil industry wastewater is not, unfortunately, disposed of in a cautious manner.<br /><br />
The most common wastewater disposal method is to inject it underground. It was recently revealed that California regulators have allowed <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/03/california-regulators-allowed-hundreds-oil-industry-wastewater-injection-wells-drilled-aquifers-drinkable-water" target="_blank">hundreds of injection wells to pump wastewater into aquifers</a> protected under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. Regulators also permitted <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/11/not-hundreds-thousands-oil-industry-injection-wells-dumping-wastewater-protected-california-aquifers" target="_blank">thousands more wells to inject fluids from “enhanced oil recovery”</a> techniques like acidization and cyclic steam injection into protected aquifers.</p>
<!--break-->
<p><br />
Wastewater is also sometimes stored in pits, but again, California regulators have failed to enforce proper safeguards. Clean Water Action released a report last year detailing the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/11/19/reports-show-regulators-are-failing-protect-californians-oil-development" target="_blank">threat to California's air and water from the open, unlined pits</a> used to store much of the oil industry's toxic wastewater. According to <a href="http://cleanwateraction.org/publication/pits" target="_blank">the report</a>, at least 432 of these pits are currently in use in California, most of them operating with an expired permit or no permit at all.<br /><br />
“Cancer-causing chemicals are surfacing in fracking flowback fluid just as we learn that the California oil industry is disposing of wastewater in hundreds of illegal disposal wells and open pits,” said Hollin Kretzmann, the <span class="caps">CBD</span> lawyer who conducted the analysis. “Gov. Brown needs to shut down all the illegal wells immediately and ban fracking to fight this devastating threat to California’s water supply.”<br /><br />
It wasn’t just the chemicals Kretzmann found in fracking flowback that are a cause for concern, either. Laxe enforcement of reporting rules make it hard to determine the true extent of the problem, though the <span class="caps">CBD</span> still found enough to raise serious questions about the threats flowback fluid poses to public health:</p>
<blockquote>
<strong>• High chromium-6 levels:</strong> Chromium-6 was found in fracking flowback at levels up to 2,700 times the recommended level set by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.<br /><br /><strong>• Missing reports:</strong> At least 100 fracking flowback tests are missing from the reporting website managed by California’s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources, in violation of state law.<br /><br /><strong>• Missing benzene data:</strong> Only 329 of the 479 fracking fluid chemical tests on the state oil agency’s website measured for benzene.<br /><br /><strong>*bull; Benzene common:</strong> Of those 329 chemical tests that measured for benzene, 323 detected benzene while only six did not.<br /><br /><strong>• Dangerous toluene levels:</strong> Toluene, a toxin that can affect the central nervous system and harm developing fetuses, was found to exceed federal-mandated limits for drinking water 118 times.</blockquote>
<p>In some cases, benzene levels in fracking flowback were over 1,500 times the level the federal government says is safe for drinking water. Both chromium-6 and benzene are known carcinogens.<br /><br />
California is the country’s third-largest oil producing state, with some 20% of its oil production coming from fracked wells, <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_27327025/study-half-californias-new-wells-involve-fracking" target="_blank">according to a recent study</a> that also found that half of all new wells drilled in the past decade use fracking.<br /> </p>
<p style="font-size:9px"><em>Image Credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-223323229/stock-photo-oil-and-gas-well-silhouette-in-remote-rural-area-profiled-on-sunset-sky.html?src=rs_a0K0Sjn8MlInOZar2LQ-1-24&amp;ws=1" target="_blank">Calin Tatu / Shutterstock.com</a></em></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/745">california</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11835">flowback</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6843">wastewater</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6180">water</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2920">pollution</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15915">pits</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6687">Clean Water Action</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1286">oil</a></div></div></div>Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:58:00 +0000Mike Gaworecki9100 at http://www.desmogblog.comCalifornia's Wastewater Injection Problem Is Way Worse Than Previously Reportedhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/11/not-hundreds-thousands-oil-industry-injection-wells-dumping-wastewater-protected-california-aquifers
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_207917662.jpg?itok=t4vtJnjJ" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Documents released this week as part of the <span class="caps">EPA</span>’s investigation into the state of California’s underground injection control program show that in addition to <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/03/california-regulators-allowed-hundreds-oil-industry-wastewater-injection-wells-drilled-aquifers-drinkable-water" target="_blank">hundreds of wastewater injection wells </a>there are thousands more wells illegally injecting fluids from “enhanced oil recovery” into aquifers protected by the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.<br /><br />
At a time when <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/29/no-end-sight-california-s-climate-exacerbated-drought" target="_blank">California is experiencing extreme and prolonged drought</a>, you might expect state regulators to do everything they can to protect sources of water that could be used for drinking and irrigation. But that simply isn’t the case.<br /><br />
For every barrel of oil produced in California — the third largest oil-producing state in the nation, behind Texas and North Dakota — there are 10 barrels of wastewater requiring disposal. California produces roughly 575,000 barrels of oil a day, meaning there are nearly 6 million barrels of wastewater produced in the Golden State on a daily basis — a massive waste stream that state regulators have utterly failed to manage properly.<br /><br />
In meeting a February 6 deadline imposed by the <span class="caps">EPA</span> to provide a plan for dealing with the problems rampant in its <a href="http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dog/general_information/Pages/UndergroundInjectionControl%28UIC%29.aspx" target="_blank">Underground Injection Control (<span class="caps">UIC</span>) Class <span class="caps">II</span> Program</a>, regulators at California’s Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (<span class="caps">DOGGR</span>) revealed that nearly <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Enclosure%20B%20-%20Breakdown%20of%20Potential%20Wells%20Injecting%20into%20NonExempt%20Zones%202-5-15.pdf" target="_blank">2,500 wells have been permitted to inject oil and gas waste into protected aquifers</a>, a clear violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act.<br /><br />
More than 2,000 of the wells are currently active, with 490 used for injection of oil and gas wastewater and 1,987 used to dispose of fluids or steam used in enhanced oil recovery techniques like acidization and cyclic steam injection.<br /><br />
“The Division acknowledges that in the past it has approved <span class="caps">UIC</span> projects in zones with aquifers lacking exemptions,” <span class="caps">DOGGR</span> told the <span class="caps">EPA</span> in a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/FINAL_Dual%20Letterhead_US%20EPA%20Letter_02-06-15_3PM.pdf" target="_blank">letter dated Feb. 6</a>.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>This issue was first brought to the public’s attention last year when the <span class="caps">EPA</span> was forced to step in and issue <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/07/21/california-orders-emergency-shutdown-fracking-wastewater-injection-sites-over-fears-contaminated-aquifers" target="_blank">emergency shutdown orders for 11 injection wells</a>, 9 of which were eventually confirmed to be <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/07/central-california-aquifers-contaminated-billions-gallons-fracking-wastewater" target="_blank">illegally dumping wastewater into protected California aquifers</a>.<br /><br />
The <span class="caps">EPA</span> first learned of the extent of the problem in 2011, when it performed an audit of California’s <span class="caps">UIC</span> Class <span class="caps">II</span> Program and found serious problems, many of which date all the way back to the early 1980s, when the federal agency formally turned over control of underground injection activities to the state. The program, as <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/State-let-oil-companies-taint-drinkable-water-in-6054242.php" target="_blank">documented by the San Francisco Chronicle</a>, was practically doomed from the start, as there were two lists of aquifers exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act, and no one could agree on which was the correct list.<br /><br />
Given this troubled history and the fact that <span class="caps">DOGGR</span> regulators have continued to issue permits to thousands of injection wells despite their inability to ensure that the wells weren’t polluting otherwise useable sources of water, activists are calling on California Governor Jerry Brown to immediately shut down all of the offending wells.<br /><br />
“The oil industry is contaminating California’s water supplies and violating federal law on a massive scale,” Kassie Siegel of the Center’s Climate Law Institute said in a statement. “Gov. Brown has a moral and legal duty to immediately shut down every single illegal production and wastewater disposal well. The size of this problem shows how big a threat the oil industry’s toxic waste is to California’s precious water supplies.”<br /><br />
Oil and gas wastewater is generally much saltier than seawater and can contain heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and radioactive material. Once an aquifer is contaminated with this wastewater, it is extremely difficult to make the water clean enough for drinking or useful for agricultural purposes. Often, an aquifer contaminated with oil and gas wastewater has to be removed from the state’s water cycle altogether.<br /><br />
“Given that California is also experiencing its worst drought in 1,200 years, it’s hard to overstate just how thoroughly the regulatory system has failed to protect this extremely precious resource,” says Briana Mordick, a staff scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council.<br /><br />
In the Feb. 6 letter, <span class="caps">DOGGR</span> proposes that new and existing wells injecting into aquifers that are not exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act be “either phased out or covered by an aquifer exemption.”<br /><br />
But according to a coalition of environment groups including <span class="caps">NRDC</span>, Clean Water Action and the Environmental Working Group, the two-year timeline in <span class="caps">DOGGR</span>'s proposal should be a non-starter for the <span class="caps">EPA</span>. The wells should be shut down immediately, they say, either by the <span class="caps">EPA</span> or Governor Brown.<br /><br />
“The State has identified over 2,000 wells that may be impacting drinking water, yet regulators continue to allow injection into groundwater that should be protected by law,” said Andrew Grinberg of Clean Water Action. “This is a massive failure to implement the Safe Drinking Water Act and <span class="caps">EPA</span> should intervene immediately to shut these wells down due to the lack of state enforcement. Anyone who cares about clean drinking and irrigation water should be outraged that state regulators are putting the oil industry ahead of public safety.”<br /><br />
“We don’t need a phase-out or new aquifer exemptions,” the Center for Biological Diversity’s Siegel says. “We’re suffering the worst drought in recorded history. We need Gov. Brown to immediately halt the ongoing illegal activities.”<br /><br />
Over the past 4 years since the <span class="caps">EPA</span> performed its audit of the California injection program, <span class="caps">DOGGR</span>’s sluggish response has allowed billions more gallons of wastewater to be injected into underground sources of drinking water, these environmentalists say.<br /><br />
“It appears that the <span class="caps">EPA</span> made a mistake when they delegated the important responsibility of managing the Underground Injection Program to <span class="caps">DOGGR</span> in 1982,” said Bill Allayaud of the Environmental Working Group. “For the last 30 years the program has allowed highly questionable practices that have endangered drinking water, and it has been run without transparency by an agency that essentially ignored fracking for decades.”</p>
<p style="font-size:9px"><em>Image Credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-207917662/stock-photo-contaminated-water.html?src=gzaz-a3uI5AVAiZVq8bMIA-1-10&amp;ws=1" target="_blank">Member / Shutterstock.com</a></em></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-upload field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><table class="sticky-enabled">
<thead><tr><th>Attachment</th><th>Size</th> </tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd"><td><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/FINAL_Dual%20Letterhead_US%20EPA%20Letter_02-06-15_3PM.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=138771">FINAL_Dual Letterhead_US EPA Letter_02-06-15_3PM.pdf</a></span></td><td>135.52 KB</td> </tr>
<tr class="even"><td><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Enclosure%20B%20-%20Breakdown%20of%20Potential%20Wells%20Injecting%20into%20NonExempt%20Zones%202-5-15.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=42592">Enclosure B - Breakdown of Potential Wells Injecting into NonExempt Zones 2-5-15.pdf</a></span></td><td>41.59 KB</td> </tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1286">oil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6843">wastewater</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1287">gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13014">Injection Wells</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/745">california</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17412">Environmental Protect Agency</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/epa">EPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19657">Division of Oil Gas &amp; Geothermal Resources</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19605">DOGGR</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6687">Clean Water Action</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6014">Environmental Working Group</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4317">Natural Resources Defense Council</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3373">NRDC</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19294">Governor Jerry Brown</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19472">aquifers</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6180">water</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6019">drinking water</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19659">irrigation</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8916">water pollution</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8607">hydrocarbons</a></div></div></div>Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:58:00 +0000Mike Gaworecki9078 at http://www.desmogblog.comCalifornia Regulators Allowed Oil Industry To Drill Hundreds Of Wastewater Injection Wells Into Aquifers With Drinkable Waterhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/03/california-regulators-allowed-hundreds-oil-industry-wastewater-injection-wells-drilled-aquifers-drinkable-water
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_15541978.jpg?itok=cE3GlSAW" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><strong>Update 02/11/15: </strong>The problems with California's underground injection control program are far worse than originally reported. It has now been revealed that California regulators with <span class="caps">DOGGR</span> not only permitted hundreds of wastewater injection wells but also <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/11/not-hundreds-thousands-oil-industry-injection-wells-dumping-wastewater-protected-california-aquifers" target="_blank">thousands more wells injecting fluids for “enhanced oil recovery” into aquifers</a> protected under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.<br /><br /><strong>Original post: </strong>The fallout from the ongoing review of California’s deeply flawed <a href="http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dog/general_information/Pages/UndergroundInjectionControl%28UIC%29.aspx" target="_blank">Underground Injection Control program</a> continues as new documents reveal that state regulators are investigating more than 500 injection wells for potentially dumping oil industry wastewater into aquifers protected under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act as well as state law.<br /><br />
Last July, the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Environmental Protection Agency (<span class="caps">EPA</span>) ordered an <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/07/21/california-orders-emergency-shutdown-fracking-wastewater-injection-sites-over-fears-contaminated-aquifers" target="_blank">emergency shutdown of 11 wastewater injection wells</a> in California. In October, nine of the wells were <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/07/central-california-aquifers-contaminated-billions-gallons-fracking-wastewater" target="_blank">confirmed to have been illegally dumping wastewater</a> into protected aquifers.<br /><br />
Now a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/14%208%2018%20Bohlen%20Email%20to%20Blumenfled%20with%20attachment%20%282%29.pdf">letter from Steve Bohlen</a>, the State Oil and Gas Supervisor for California’s Division of Oil, Gas <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Geothermal Resources (<span class="caps">DOGGR</span>), sent to the <span class="caps">EPA</span> on August 18, 2014 but just revealed via a Freedom of Information Act request, shows that the problem is much more widespread than previously disclosed to the public.<br /><br />
A copy of the letter was shared with DeSmogBlog by the Center for Biological Diversity. “<span class="caps">EPA</span> has confirmed to us and to the San Francisco Chronicle that Steve Bohlen’s list shows 532 wells believed to be injecting into protected aquifers,” according to Patrick Sullivan, a spokesperson for the <span class="caps">CBD</span>.<br /><br />
Under federal law, any aquifer with water that contains less than 10,000 parts-per-million of total dissolved solids (such as salt and other minerals) is protected. Sullivan told DeSmog that the 532 wells are all injecting wastewater into water that is either cleaner than 10,000 ppm <span class="caps">TDS</span> or with unknown <span class="caps">TDS</span>. <span class="caps">CBD</span> has <a href="http://cbdnet.info/public/injectionwells.html" target="_blank">mapped all of the injection wells</a> in question.<br /><br />
“We know that at least 170 of these wells were drilled into aquifers with <span class="caps">TDS</span> of below 3,000 — which means they are suitable for drinking water,” Sullivan says. “Hundreds more are injecting into aquifers below 10,000 <span class="caps">TDS</span>, which is water that likely could be made usable.”<br /><br />
In response to the revelations, <span class="caps">CBD</span> sent a <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/water_supply/pdfs/CenterLetterToEPAOnInjectionWells_02-02-2015.pdf" target="_blank">letter to the <span class="caps">EPA</span></a> demanding an immediate shutdown of all oil industry injection wells in the state that are injecting wastewater into protected aquifers.<br /><br />
“Because the state has failed to protect our water or uphold the law, action by the <span class="caps">EPA</span> Administrator is legally required,” the letter states. “In the midst of an unprecedented drought and when so many Californians lack access to safe, clean drinking water, it is outrageous to allow contamination of drinking and irrigation water to continue.”</p>
<!--break-->
<p><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/State-let-oil-companies-taint-drinkable-water-in-6054242.php" target="_blank">According to the San Francisco Chronicle</a>, which has also reviewed the data provided by <span class="caps">DOGGR</span> to the <span class="caps">EPA</span>, there are no signs yet that any sources of drinking water have actually been tainted, but the <span class="caps">EPA</span> is poised to step in if necessary because the state has had decades to fix the problem and has failed to do so:</p>
<blockquote>
Oil companies in drought-ravaged California have, for years, pumped wastewater from their operations into aquifers that had been clean enough for people to drink.<br /><br />
They did it with explicit permission from state regulators, who were supposed to protect the increasingly strained groundwater supplies from contamination.<br /><br />
Instead, the state allowed companies to drill more than 170 waste-disposal wells into aquifers suitable for drinking or irrigation, according to data reviewed by The Chronicle.<br /><br />
…<br /><br />
So far, tests of nearby drinking-water wells show no contamination, state officials say. But the federal Environmental Protection Agency, which helped uncover the practice, is threatening to seize control of regulating the waste-injection wells, a job it has left to California officials for over 30 years. The state faces a Feb. 6 deadline to tell the <span class="caps">EPA</span> how it plans to fix the problem and prevent it from happening again.</blockquote>
<p><br />
Oil industry wastewater is extremely briny (saltier even than seawater — so salty it can kill plants) and typically contains a variety of toxic chemicals associated with the oil production process. Given that hydraulic fracturing (a.k.a. fracking) has been <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article6497937.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&amp;utm_medium=twitter" target="_blank">used by half of all new wells drilled in California</a> over the past decade, this wastewater is also increasingly likely to contain fracking chemicals that have been linked to cancer and other severe health problems.<br /><br />
Given that <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/29/no-end-sight-california-s-climate-exacerbated-drought" target="_blank">California is entering into a fourth year of epic drought</a>, it would certainly seem prudent to rein in the oil industry's waste stream once and for all.<br /><br />
“California’s drinking water aquifers shouldn’t be garbage dumps for the oil industry,” Kassie Siegel, director of <span class="caps">CBD</span>’s Climate Law Institute, said in a statement. “It’s legally required and just common sense that every well injecting wastewater illegally be shut down immediately to avoid further damage.”<br /> </p>
<p style="font-size:9px"><em>Image Credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-15541978/stock-photo-the-dense-kern-river-oil-fields-near-bakersfield-california.html?src=wmbx-4zcowVdn1TYePKMfg-1-22&amp;ws=1" target="_blank">Richard Thornton / Shutterstock.com</a></em></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-upload field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><table class="sticky-enabled">
<thead><tr><th>Attachment</th><th>Size</th> </tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd"><td><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/14%208%2018%20Bohlen%20Email%20to%20Blumenfled%20with%20attachment%20%282%29.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=1380613">14 8 18 Bohlen Email to Blumenfled with attachment (2).pdf</a></span></td><td>1.32 MB</td> </tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1286">oil</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6843">wastewater</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13014">Injection Wells</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/745">california</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19657">Division of Oil Gas &amp; Geothermal Resources</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19605">DOGGR</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/epa">EPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1471">Environmental Protection Agency</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19658">CBD</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6180">water</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6146">Safe Drinking Water Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19659">irrigation</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2920">pollution</a></div></div></div>Tue, 03 Feb 2015 18:37:03 +0000Mike Gaworecki9051 at http://www.desmogblog.comEnbridge Gets Another Federal Tar Sands Crude Pipeline Permit As Senate Debates Keystone XLhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/28/enbridge-gets-another-federal-tar-sands-pipeline-permit-senate-debates-keystone-xl
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_212874034.jpg?itok=hWTkzYqi" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>On January 16, the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Army Corps of Engineers gave <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4389">Enbridge</a> a controversial <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/14049">Nationwide Permit 12</a> green-light for its proposed <a href="http://www.enbridge.com/Line78PipelineProject/Maps.aspx">Line 78 pipeline</a>, set to bring heavy tar sands <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6951">diluted bitumen (“dilbit”)</a> from Pontiac, Illinois to its <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/15732">Griffith, Indiana holding terminal</a>.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Army%20Corps%20of%20Engineers%20Line%2078%20Permit.pdf">permit</a> for the pipeline with the capacity to carry 800,000 barrels-per-day of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a> dilbit came ten days after the introduction of <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1">S.1 — the Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> Pipeline Act</a> <span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">— currently up for debate on the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Senate floor, which calls for the permitting of the northern leg of TransCanada's <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5857">Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span></a>. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Army%20Corps%20of%20Engineers%20Line%2078%20Permit.pdf"><img alt="Enbridge Line 78 Army Corps of Engineers Permit" src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Screen%20Shot%202015-01-26%20at%204.47.32%20PM.png" style="width: 500px; height: 547px;" /></a></span></p>
<p>Griffith is located just south of Whiting, Indiana, home of a massive refinery owned by <span class="caps">BP</span>. In November 2013, <a href="http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/press-releases/bp-completes-commissioning-of-whiting-refinery-units.html"><span class="caps">BP</span> opened its Whiting Modernization Project</a>, which <a href="http://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/pdf/WRMP.pdf">retooled to refine up to 85-percent of its capacity as heavy dilbit from the tar sands</a>, up from its initial 20-percent capacity.</p>
<p><!--break--></p>
<h3>
Legal Challenge</h3>
<p style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;">In July 2014, environmental groups including the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, Center for Biological Diversity and Environmental Law and Policy Center <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Comments%20of%20Sierra%20Club%2C%20et%20al%2C%20on%20the%20Enbridge%20Line%2078%20pipeline.pdf">submitted a letter to the Army Corps</a>, requesting a full <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5869">National Environmental Policy Act (<span class="caps">NEPA</span>)</a> review for Enbridge's proposal. </p>
<p style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;">As with <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/10/13/us-court-keystone-xl-profits-more-important-than-environment">TransCanada's Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> southern leg</a>, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/19/key-environmental-law-doesnt-apply-enbridge-flanagan-south-keystone-xl-clone">Enbridge's Flanagan South</a> and <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/energy/dirty_energy_development/oil_shale_and_tar_sands/pdfs/Alberta_Clipper_complaint.pdf">Enbridge's Alberta Clipper expansion</a>, Enbridge dodged a more democratic and transparent <a href="http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/"><span class="caps">NEPA</span> review</a> from the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Environmental Protection Agency and other executive agencies.</p>
<p style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;">“Once again, the Corps has improperly segmented its approval of an Enbridge tar sands pipeline so as to avoid evaluating the project's true environmental impacts or the impacts of the ongoing expansion of the Enbridge system,” <a href="https://content.sierraclub.org/environmentallaw/profile/staff/doug-hayes-staff-attorney">Doug Hayes</a>, staff attorney for the Sierra Club, told DeSmogBlog. </p>
<h3>
TransCanada Energy East Clone</h3>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;">Just as DeSmogBlog has called Enbridge's north-to-south dilbit pipeline network a “<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/17587">Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> Clone</a>,” Enbridge has quietly proposed and is currently permitting into existence a clone of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5420">TransCanada</a>'s controversial <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/13331">Energy East</a> </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;">dilbit</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;"> pipeline. </span></p>
<p>According to the <a href="http://www.enbridge.com/Line78PipelineProject/Maps.aspx">map of Line 78 on Enbridge's website</a>, the pipeline will connect with <a href="http://www.enbridge.com/Line6BReplacementProjects.aspx">Line 6B</a> in Griffith. Line 6B is infamous for the biggest <span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;">dilbit</span> pipeline spill in <span class="caps">U.S.</span> history. Taking place in Kalamazoo, Michigan, environmental activists and advocates now refer to the 1 million+ barrel spill as the “<a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/special-focus-topics/dilbit-disaster">dilbit disaster</a>.”</p>
<p>Line 6B will then connect with Enbridge's proposed <a href="http://www.enbridge.com/ECRAI.aspx">Line 9 Reversal project (also known as the Eastern Canadian Refinery Access Initiative)</a>, which will bring tar sands <span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">dilbit</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> to Canada's east coast </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">— <a href="http://www.energyeastpipeline.com/home/route-map/">like Energy East</a> </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">— </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">for potential export.</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span></p>
<h3>
<span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Declaration of Money</span></h3>
<p style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation and the Center for Biological Diversity, 350 Minnesota, Honor the Earth, Indigenous Environmental Network and others also <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/alberta-clipper-11-12-2014.html">sued the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> State Department on November 12</a> in an ongoing lawsuit for what they say was a violation of <span class="caps">NEPA</span> with regards to the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/27/state-department-enbridge-tar-sands-pipeline-workaround-industry-torture-ties">State Department's covert approval of the Alberta Clipper expansion project</a>.</span></p>
<p style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px;"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Enbridge%20Motion%20to%20Intervene.pdf">Enbridge requested to enter the case as an intervenor</a> and the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Enbridge%20Motion%20to%20Intervene%20Granted%20by%20Judge.pdf">magistrate judge for the case recently accepted the request</a>. Enbridge and the State Department <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Jan%2030%20Deadline%20to%20Respond%20by%20for%20Enbridge%2C%20US%20Gov.pdf">have until January 30 to respond to the initial legal complaint</a>. </span></p>
<p>As perhaps a foreshadowing of things to come, <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-kratsch-pe/27/b8b/724">Robert Kratsch</a> <span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">— a m</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">anager of design and construction for Enbridge and the lead point of contact for the Alberta Clipper expansion proposal </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">— <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Point%20Ten%20-%20Only%20Point%20That%20Matters%20in%20Whole%20Case.pdf">submitted a crucial legal memo in support of Enbridge's intervention</a> on December 5. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">In so doing, Kratsch echoed the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/10/13/us-court-keystone-xl-profits-more-important-than-environment">judge's ruling in the <span class="caps">NEPA</span> lawsuit filed by environmental groups </a>against the Army Corps of Engineers as it pertains to <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/11030">Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> South</a>. </span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">After spending nine paragraphs explaining what the pipeline is and does, Kratsch delivered his knock-out blow, stating that nullifying the Alberta Clipper expansion project would put a damper on the company's potential corporate profits. </span></p>
<p><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Point%20Ten%20-%20Only%20Point%20That%20Matters%20in%20Whole%20Case.pdf"><img alt="Enbridge Corporate Profits " src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Screen%20Shot%202015-01-26%20at%206.06.31%20PM.png" style="width: 560px; height: 467px;" /></a></p>
<p><span style="font-size:11px;"><em>Image Credit: <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Point%20Ten%20-%20Only%20Point%20That%20Matters%20in%20Whole%20Case.pdf"><span class="caps">U.S.</span> District Court, District of Minnesota</a></em></span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">Judge </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketanji_Brown_Jackson">Ketanji Brown Jackson</a>, an Obama appointee, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/10/13/us-court-keystone-xl-profits-more-important-than-environment">agreed with this line of argument</a> by TransCanada for Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> South. Will Judge </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_J._Davis">Michael J. Davis</a>, a Bill Clinton appointee and designated judge for the Alberta Clipper expansion legal dispute, do the same?</span></p>
<p>With the Alberta Clipper expansion pipeline legal dispute ongoing and a legal challenge to Line 78 highly possible, one thing remains certain: if the past serves as prologue, corporate profits earned and potential loses will serve as the centerpiece for Enbridge's legal argument going forward. </p>
<p>And as a <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/januaryfebruary_2015/features/sidebar_corporate_laws_origina053536.php?page=all">recent</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/januaryfebruary_2015/features/sidebar_corporate_laws_origina053536.php?page=all"> article</a> written by <a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/fac-staff/deans-faculty/greenfieldk.html">Boston College Law School professor </a></span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.bc.edu/schools/law/fac-staff/deans-faculty/greenfieldk.html">Kent Greenfield</a> (</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.389999985694885px; line-height: 1.5em;">author of the book </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">”</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Failure-Corporate-Law-Possibilities/dp/0226306941">The Failure of Corporate Law: Fundamental Flaws and Progressive Possibilities</a>”)</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">explains, these dynamics have played out for almost a century.</span></p>
<p><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">“</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">The eventual decision was, and still stands for, an iconic statement that corporations have no obligations beyond the bottom line,” Greenfield wrote in pointing to the landmark 1919 </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.">Dodge v. Ford Motor Co.</a> decision handed down by the Michigan Supreme Court. “</span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Courts, then and now…did not, and still do not, typically overturn the considered decisions of corporate managers.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:11px;"><em>Image Credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-273193p1.html"><span style="letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Imilian </span></a>| <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&amp;language=en&amp;ref_site=photo&amp;search_source=search_form&amp;version=llv1&amp;anyorall=all&amp;safesearch=1&amp;use_local_boost=1&amp;searchterm=approved&amp;show_color_wheel=1&amp;orient=&amp;commercial_ok=&amp;media_type=images&amp;search_cat=&amp;searchtermx=&amp;photographer_name=&amp;people_gender=&amp;people_age=&amp;people_ethnicity=&amp;people_number=&amp;color=&amp;page=1&amp;inline=212874034">Shutterstock</a></em></span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4389">Enbridge</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/16945">Line 61</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19622">Judge Michael J. Davis</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19623">Ketanji Brown Jackson</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4132">National Wildlife Federation</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19624">Robert Kratsch</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5869">National Environmental Policy Act</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8672">NEPA</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19621">Environmental Law and Policy Center</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14490">NWF</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19611">Keystone XL Pipeline Act</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19612">S.1. 2015</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10224">Dilbit Disaster</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10226">Line 6B</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19620">Enbridge Line 6B</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19618">Nationwide 12 Permit</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19619">NWP 12 Permit</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/16254">Heavy Crude</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/16255">Heavy Oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1165">Alberta</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/canada">canada</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1209">Illinois</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2439">indiana</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2714">Chicago</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19613">Chicagoland</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/666">Sierra Club</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9356">Army Corps of Engineers</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14353">U.S. Army Corps of Engineers</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9349">U.S. State Department</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10292">United States State Department</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5573">State Department</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19549">State Dept.</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19625">U.S. State Dept.</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19626">United States State Dept.</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8896">U.S. Department of State</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10293">United States Department of State</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19550">U.S. Dept. of State</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19627">United States Dept. of State</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19614">United States Army Corps of Engineers</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19615">Enbridge Line 61</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/16940">Enbridge Line 78</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15702">BP Whiting Refinery</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19616">Whiting Indiana</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/oil-sands">oil sands</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6950">dilbit</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6951">diluted bitumen</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1003">british petroleum</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17587">Keystone XL Clone</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13331">energy east</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19617">TransCanada Energy East</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5420">TransCanada</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8276">kxl</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17652">#NoKXL</a></div></div></div>Wed, 28 Jan 2015 19:26:22 +0000Steve Horn9026 at http://www.desmogblog.comObama Administration Sued Over Gulf Of Mexico Frackinghttp://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/12/obama-admin-sued-over-gulf-mexico-fracking
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/offshore%20fracking.jpg?itok=yOtllfMU" width="200" height="150" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>At a time when the rest of the world (<a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/04/07/six-reasons-fracking-has-flopped-overseas/">for a host of reasons</a>) is shying away from the hydraulic fracturing “boom,” the United States appears to be hell-bent on allowing fracking in every available space. The <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/28/obama-gulf-of-mexico-offshore-fracking">latest target for the industry</a> has been the already imperiled Gulf of Mexico, the same <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/03/01/mardi-gras-beads-bands-and-bp-oil">waters that are still reeling</a> from the effects of <span class="caps">BP</span>’s Deepwater Horizon oil disaster.</p>
<p>In its haste to allow as much fracking as possible in the Gulf, the Obama administration has repeatedly failed to release information about the dangers of fracking in the Gulf of Mexico, as well as information regarding the total number of permits that have been issued.</p>
<p>But a <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2015/fracking-01-08-2015.html">new lawsuit by The Center for Biological Diversity</a> seeks to make that information public.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2015/fracking-01-08-2015.html">lawsuit says</a> that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement are obligated to release this information to the public. The government has so far failed to respond to the group’s <span class="caps">FOIA</span> request to make this information known to the public.</p>
<p>The risks of offshore fracking are well known, and <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/offshore_fracking/pdfs/Troubled_Waters.pdf">The Center for Biological Diversity has a report</a> that details the dangers that have already been realized off the coast of California, where offshore fracking has been under way for some time.</p>
<p>In that report, <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/offshore_fracking/pdfs/Troubled_Waters.pdf">the Center uncovered</a> some disturbing trends about the wastewater that is created during fracking:</p>
<!--break-->
<p style="margin-left:.5in;">Half of the oil platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel discharge all or a portion of their produced water, including fracking chemicals, into the ocean. The federal government has given oil companies permission to dump more than 9 billion gallons of wastewater a year into the ocean off California’s coast.</p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;">When wastewater is not dumped into the ocean, it is reinjected into the seafloor or transported for onshore underground injection. Even this disposal method can result in leaks. For example, 30 percent of offshore oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico experienced well casing damage in the first five years after drilling, and damage increased over time to 50 percent after 20 years. Loss of well casing integrity is one of the main pathways for contamination of ground and surface waters.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/offshore_fracking/pdfs/Troubled_Waters.pdf">Center also found</a> out that some of the common chemicals used in fracking operations pose a serious threat to marine life, and that spills or chemical leaks are occurring regularly on fracking platforms in California.</p>
<p>Again, the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem has yet to recover from the Deepwater Horizon disaster that occurred nearly 5 years ago.<br /><br />
Expanded fracking operations in the Gulf are an enormous cause for concern for the region, but the Obama administration insists on keeping the public in the dark. And as we see so often in American politics, if politicians refuse to release information, it is almost always because the information is less than comforting.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5227">politics</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2702">obama</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/lawsuit">lawsuit</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5087">Gulf of Mexico</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6497">Offshore</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/745">california</a></div></div></div>Mon, 12 Jan 2015 19:07:19 +0000Farron Cousins8976 at http://www.desmogblog.comCalifornia Court Rejects Misleading Language In Local Fracking Ballot Initiative--Twicehttp://www.desmogblog.com/2015/01/07/california-court-rejects-misleading-language-local-fracking-ballot-initiative
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_196159115.jpg?itok=0Uoeypu5" width="200" height="305" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Residents of La Habra Heights in Los Angeles County, California want their city to become the latest to ban fracking and other high intensity oil extraction methods, and have placed an initiative on the March 2015 ballot to do just that.<br /><br />
The residents and activists seeking to ban fracking in La Habra Heights won a significant battle on New Year’s Eve when inaccurate and misleading ballot language backed by the oil and gas industry was <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2014/12/31/court-rejects-inaccurate-misleading-language-la-habra-heights-fracking-ballot" target="_blank">rejected by the Los Angeles Superior Court</a>. Now they've won a second victory against the oil and gas companies trying to game the citizen initiative system.<br /><br />
“The Healthy City Initiative,” also known as <a href="http://ballotpedia.org/City_of_La_Habra_Heights_Ban_on_New_Oil_%26_Gas_Wells_and_Fracking_Initiative_(March_2015)" target="_blank">Measure A</a>, seeks to ban fracking and would also prohibit any new oil and gas wells from being drilled within city limits, as well as bar dormant wells from being reactivated. The intention is to stop La Habra Heights from becoming the latest <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/12/02/hard-times-boom-town-pennsylvania-residents-describe-costs-fracking" target="_blank">fracking boom town</a> without shuttering current oil and gas development projects, so as to have as minimal an impact on the local economy as possible while ensuring the future health and viabillity of the community.<br /><br />
Earthjustice sued the city of La Habra Heights on December 1 on behalf of residents, La Habra Heights Oil Watch, and the Center for Biological Diversity after the city included oil and gas industry language on the ballot that, according to an <a href="http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2014/la-habra-heights-residents-sue-to-ensure-fairness-in-fracking-ballot-initiative" target="_blank">Earthjustice press release</a>, “inaccurately summarizes the language that was circulated to and signed by voters in order to place the initiative on the ballot in the first place.”</p>
<!--break-->
<p>In <a href="http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/LHH-Decision-12-31-2014-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">ruling in favor of the plaintiffs</a> on December 31, the <span class="caps">LA</span> Superior Court ordered the city to revise the wording that will be included on the ballot. The city proposed new language on January 5, but it “continued to improperly portray Measure A as having a broad application to all treatments of oil and gas wells,” according to yet <a href="http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2015/la-habra-heights-residents-win-again-in-court-battle-over-fracking-ballot-initiative" target="_blank">another Earthjustice press release</a>.<br /><br />
The <span class="caps">LA</span> Superior Court <a href="http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2015/la-habra-heights-residents-win-again-in-court-battle-over-fracking-ballot-initiative" target="_blank">struck down the city's language</a> once again today, January 7.<br /><br />
“Once again the court has agreed with the citizens of La Habra Heights, and has ordered that the ballot language needs to be accurate and impartial,” Earthjustice attorney Irene Gutierrez said in the latest press release. “This win today supports citizens’ right to a fair elections process.”<br /><br />
Local activists say they were motivated to place Measure A on the March 3, 2015 ballot because of the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/fracking-the-future" target="_blank">harmful effects fracking has been shown to have</a> on the environment and human health.<br /><br />
“New invasive drilling developments threaten the health of our community,” La Habra Heights Oil Watch spokeswoman Kathy Steele <a href="http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2014/la-habra-heights-residents-sue-to-ensure-fairness-in-fracking-ballot-initiative" target="_blank">said in a statement</a>. “We organized residents together to support the Healthy City Initiative, so that we can preserve the green and peaceful community we love.”<br /><br />
More specifically, Measure A is a response to Matrix Oil Co.’s plan to drill for oil in the city and how residents felt that would impact their community. “We don’t want to change the character of La Habra Heights,” Mike Hughes, president of La Habra Heights Oil Watch, <a href="http://www.whittierdailynews.com/business/20141028/la-habra-heights-group-files-signatures-for-initiative-to-ban-oil-drilling-fracking" target="_blank">told the Whittier <em>Daily News</em></a> after his group collected the signatures necessary to place the measure on the ballot.“It’s a unique environment. It’s peaceful and rural.”<br /><br />
When it was announced that Measure A had qualified for the ballot, Mike McCaskey, an executive vice president for Matrix Oil, said, “The initiative to try and shut down a project that would have widespread benefits for the city is a really bad idea.”<br /><br />
By invoking fears of a “shutdown” and lost economic opportunity, McCaskey is, inadvertently or not, echoing arguments made last year by opponents of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/26/oil-industry-front-group-sets-sights-santa-barbara-county-measure-would-ban-extreme-oil-extraction" target="_blank">a similar anti-fracking measure in Santa Barbara County</a>.<br /><br />
Another glaring similarity between the fracking fight that played out in Santa Barbara County and the one happening now in La Habra Heights: Oil industry front group Californians for Energy Independence, which <a href="http://www.whittierdailynews.com/government-and-politics/20141231/oil-companies-put-up-200000-to-fight-la-habra-heights-anti-oil-measure" target="_blank">donated $200,000 to fight Measure A</a> and also led the charge against <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/28/oil-companies-spending-big-defeat-community-led-anti-fracking-initiatives" target="_blank">Santa Barbara County’s Measure P last November</a>.<br /><br />
Californians for Energy Independence spent some <a href="http://californiansagainstfracking.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/California-Voters-Win-Ban-on-Fracking-in-San-Benito.pdf" target="_blank">$6.4 million</a> to defeat Measure P—more than was spent on any Congressional race in that election cycle—<a href="http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/Campaign/Committees/Detail.aspx?id=1365619&amp;view=received" target="_blank">every penny of which was donated by oil companies</a> like Chevron, Occidental Petroleum, and Exxon.<br /><br />
By contrast, the grassroots-supported campaign in favor of Measure P spent just $300,000, mostly raised from small donors and community members.<br /><br />
But just because Measure P in Santa Barbara County went down in defeat doesn’t mean Measure A’s chances are slim. Despite being <a href="http://californiansagainstfracking.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/California-Voters-Win-Ban-on-Fracking-in-San-Benito.pdf" target="_blank">outspent 13-to-1 by the oil industry</a>, residents of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/11/05/voters-ban-fracking-texas-california-and-ohio" target="_blank">San Benito County, California succeeded in passing a fracking ban</a> last November. Residents of <a href="http://ballotpedia.org/Mendocino_County_Community_Bill_of_Rights_Fracking_and_Water_Use_Initiative,_Measure_S_%28November_2014%29" target="_blank">Mendocino County</a>, California did, too.<br /><br />
“The defeat of Measure P in Santa Barbara does not diminish the reality that residents throughout California are standing up in growing numbers to protect their homes, schools and our state’s vulnerable water supplies,” Food <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Water Watch’s Adam Scow <a href="http://californiansagainstfracking.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/California-Voters-Win-Ban-on-Fracking-in-San-Benito.pdf" target="_blank">said last November</a>.<br /><br />
Oil and gas companies are spending disproportionate amounts of money to defeat citizen-led anti-fracking measures because they fear a domino effect, which explains why La Habra Heights’ Measure A is attracting such attention from the industry. That’s also why the city of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/11/05/breaking-denton-texas-hit-lawsuits-after-landslide-victory-fracking-ban" target="_blank">Denton, Texas was sued</a> less than 24 hours after residents passed a fracking ban there last year.<br /><br />
Of course, recent news that <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/12/17/new-york-governor-cuomo-ban-fracking-state-citing-health-threats" target="_blank">New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has banned fracking</a> might be indicative of the fact that oil and gas companies cannot keep those dominoes from falling now that the facts about fracking are coming out.<br /> </p>
<p style="font-size:9px"><em>Image Credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-196159115/stock-photo-person-holding-a-sign-saying-stop-fracking.html?src=yRQ7ehrtID6y8oKRJfPM2g-1-1" target="_blank">Zerbor / Shutterstock.com</a> </em></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19478">La Habra Heights</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19479">Lose Angeles County</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19480">Los Angeles Superior Court</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/745">california</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1286">oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1287">gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19481">oil and gas development</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10345">wells</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17731">acidization</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17730">Santa Barbara County</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/911">new york</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8892">Denton</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/917">texas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6779">fracking ban</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19482">Measure A</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18719">Californians for Energy Independence</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/19483">La Habra Heights Oil Watch</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5201">Earthjustice</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div></div></div>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 01:00:00 +0000Mike Gaworecki8964 at http://www.desmogblog.comFormer Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner's Warburg Pincus May Profit from Tar Sands Exportshttp://www.desmogblog.com/2014/11/14/former-treasury-secretary-timothy-geithner-warburg-tar-sands-exports
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/Timothy_Geithner_speaking_at_the_United_States_Treasury.jpg?itok=wXWlmj0k" width="200" height="143" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/public_lands/energy/dirty_energy_development/oil_shale_and_tar_sands/pdfs/Alberta_Clipper_complaint.pdf">Several environmental groups have filed a lawsuit</a> against the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Department of State and Secretary John Kerry over the permitting of a controversial border-crossing northern leg of a pipeline system that DeSmogBlog has called <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/4389">Enbridge</a>'s “<a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/17587">Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> Clone</a>.”</p>
<p>The <a href="http://desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5857">Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span></a> Clone<span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"> is designed to accomplish the same goal as <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5420">TransCanada</a>'s Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span>: bringing Alberta's <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a> to Gulf coast refineries and export market. It </span><span style="font-size: 12.7272720336914px; letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; line-height: 1.5em;">consists of three legs: the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/16937">Alberta Clipper</a> expansion as the northern leg, the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/14481">Flanagan South</a> middle leg and the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/16941">Seaway Twin</a> southern leg.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12.7272720336914px; letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/alberta-clipper-11-12-2014.html">Green groups have called the northern leg an “illegal scheme”</a> because </span><span style="letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; font-size: 12.4999990463257px; line-height: 19.0909080505371px;">the </span><a href="http://www.enbridge.com/MainlineEnhancementProgram/Canada/Alberta-Clipper-Capacity-Expansion.aspx" style="letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; font-size: 12.4999990463257px; line-height: 19.0909080505371px;">Enbridge Alberta Clipper expansion proposal</a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; font-size: 12.7272720336914px; line-height: 1.5em;"> didn't go through the normal State Department approval process. Instead, <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2014/08/27/state-department-enbridge-tar-sands-pipeline-workaround-industry-torture-ties">State allowed Enbridge to add pressure pumps to two </a></span><a href="http://desmogblog.com/2014/08/27/state-department-enbridge-tar-sands-pipeline-workaround-industry-torture-ties"><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">separate</span></a><span style="letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; font-size: 12.7272720336914px; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/2014/08/27/state-department-enbridge-tar-sands-pipeline-workaround-industry-torture-ties">-but-connected pipelines</a> on each side of the border and send Alberta's <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6951">diluted bitumen (“dilbit”)</a> to market.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12.7272720336914px; letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://desmogblog.com/2014/08/27/state-department-enbridge-tar-sands-pipeline-workaround-industry-torture-ties">Enbridge dodged a comprehensive State Department environmental review</a>, which involves public hearings and public commenting periods. The groups say this is illegal under the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5869">National Environmental Policy Act (<span class="caps">NEPA</span>)</a> and have demanded a re-do for Enbridge's application process.</span></p>
<p>“The only thing worse than dirty oil is dirty oil backed by dirty tricks. This is the fossil fuel equivalent of money laundering,” <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/about/staff/">Kieran Suckling</a>, executive director of the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/">Center for Biological Diversity</a>, said in a <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/alberta-clipper-11-12-2014.html">press release announcing the lawsuit</a>. “The Obama administration should be ashamed of itself for letting Enbridge illegally pump more dirty tar sands oil into the United States.”</p>
<p>The maneuver has a key<span style="font-size: 12.7272720336914px; letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">beneficiary: former Obama Administration Secretary of the Treasury, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Geithner">Timothy Geithner</a>, who <a href="http://www.warburgpincus.com/people/ViewEmployee,employeeid,449.aspx">now serves as President</a> of the private equity giant <a href="http://www.warburgpincus.com/">Warburg Pincus</a>. </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Geithner's connection to the lawsuit not only adds intrigue, but also reveals the purpose of Enbridge's Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> Clone: an export fast-track to the global market.</span></p>
<!--break-->
<h3>
Timothy Geithner, <span class="caps">MEG</span> Energy, Warburg Pincus</h3>
<p><a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/100354135">Geithner departed as Secretary of the Treasury in January 2013</a> and in November of that year, <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-16/tim-geithner-to-join-leveraged-buyout-firm-warburg-pincus.html">Warburg Pincus named Geithner president of the firm</a>. He assumed the role beginning March 2014 — a natural transition given the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Warburg#Career">Warburg family played a key role in the creation of the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Federal Reserve Bank</a>. </p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">But what do Geithner and Warburg Pincus have to do with any of this? </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Enter </span><span style="font-size: 13.3333330154419px; letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; line-height: 1.5em;">tar sands production company </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEG_Energy"><span class="caps">MEG</span> Energy</a>. Bloomberg data shows that <a href="http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/MEG%20TORONTO.xls">Warburg Pincus owns a 16.88 percent stake</a> in <span class="caps">MEG</span>, the largest equity owner of the company by percentage.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><img alt="" src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/Screen%20Shot%202014-11-13%20at%2011.25.12%20AM.png" style="width: 500px; height: 84px;" /></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><span class="caps">MEG</span> Energy, <a href="http://www.megenergy.com/sites/default/files/user_uploaded/pdf/08.06.10%20MEG%20Energy%20-%20Closing%20of%20Initial%20Public%20Offering.pdf">which went public in 2010 on the Toronto Stock Exchange</a>, owns the </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.megenergy.com/operations/christina-lake-project">Christina Lake Project</a>, the </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://www.megenergy.com/operations/surmont-project">Surmont Project</a> and other <a href="http://www.megenergy.com/operations/growth-properties">prospective tar sands production land lease holdings</a></span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">.</span></p>
<p>Beyond owning tar sands production projects, <span class="caps">MEG</span> has a contract to send its tar sands through Enbridge's Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> Clone pipeline system, according to a recent article published in the Globe and Mail. </p>
<p>“<span class="caps">MEG</span> has booked capacity for 25,000 barrels a day on the [Flanagan South] pipeline, due to start up in early December, with potential to boost shipments to 100,000 b/d over time,” <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/calgarys-meg-energy-eyes-exporting-from-us-shores/article21364214/">wrote Global and Mail reporter Jeffrey Jones</a>. </p>
<p>A document posted on the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (<span class="caps">FERC</span>) website confirms the contractual relationship between <span class="caps">MEG</span> and Enbridge. It began in December 2011, a month before <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/obama-administration-to-reject-keystone-pipeline/2012/01/18/gIQAPuPF8P_story.html">President Obama kicked the can down the road</a> on making a decision on Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span>'s northern leg.</p>
<p>“<span class="caps">MEG</span>…contracted with Enbridge…to ship crude oil on Enbridge’s Gulf Coast Access Project for service from Flanagan, Illinois to Cushing, Oklahoma and on to the Texas Gulf Coast, pursuant to an executed Transportation Services Agreement (<span class="caps">MEG</span> <span class="caps">TSA</span>),” <a href="http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/Files/20120511152816-IS12-226-000.pdf">reads the <span class="caps">FERC</span> document</a>.</p>
<h3>
<span class="caps">MEG</span> and Tar Sands Exports</h3>
<p>On <a href="http://seekingalpha.com/article/2613735-meg-energys-megef-ceo-bill-mccaffrey-on-q3-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single"><span class="caps">MEG</span>'s quarter three investor call</a>, the company said it is considering applying for a permit to export tar sands from the Gulf coast. </p>
<p>“We certainly are looking at those types of things. We are well positioned,” <a href="http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=9447586&amp;ticker=MEG:CN">Bill McCaffery, <span class="caps">CEO</span> of <span class="caps">MEG</span> Energy</a>, said on the <a href="http://seekingalpha.com/article/2613735-meg-energys-megef-ceo-bill-mccaffrey-on-q3-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single">earnings call</a>. He also noted that <span class="caps">MEG</span> has achieved record quarterly tar sands production rates.</p>
<p>“If you take the Flanagan/Seaway combination, obviously it lands us in Houston area and obviously you can move to other built areas…We have not applied that at this stage, but we are evaluating that,” McCaffery continued.</p>
<p>Enbridge also has skin in the tar sands export game via its subsidiary <a href="http://www.tidal-energy.com/main/page/home">Tidal Energy Marketing</a> and <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/04/05/uk-usa-exports-oil-idUKBREA331ON20140405">has already exported tar sands crude to Italy and Spain</a>. Enbridge received a permit from the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> government <a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/04/05/uk-usa-exports-oil-idUKBREA331ON20140405">to export “limited quantities” of tar sands crude this past spring</a>.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.enterpriseproducts.com/index.asp">Enterprise Products Partners</a>, the <a href="http://seawaypipeline.com/">co-owner of the Seaway Twin pipeline with Enbridge</a>, also is a player in the oil exports game.</p>
<p>In June, the <a href="http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-ruling-would-allow-first-shipments-of-unrefined-oil-overseas-1403644494">Obama Administration issued a permit to Enterprise to export oil condensate</a> originating from the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7759">Eagle Ford Shale</a> basin, the first <span class="caps">U.S.</span> unrefined oil product exported from the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> in over four decades. </p>
<h3>
“State Department Oil Services”</h3>
<p>When 2016 Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State, DeSmogBlog referred to the State Department's backroom wheeling and dealing done on behalf of TransCanada and the proposed Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> pipeline<span style="font-size: 12.7272720336914px; letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; line-height: 1.5em;"> </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">as “<a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/hillary-clinton-s-state-department-oil-services-and-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline-video">State Department Oil Services</a>.” </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">It now appears Enbridge has taken a lesson from TransCanada's playbook, with Geithner's Warburg Pincus chomping at the bit for dilbit to flow through Enbridge's Keystone <span class="caps">XL</span> Clone and to the global market.</span></p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>[T]he State Department must stop turning a blind eye to Big Oil schemes to bypass <span class="caps">U.S.</span> laws and nearly double the amount of corrosive, carbon-intensive tar sands crude it brings into our country,” said <span style="font-size: 12.7272720336914px; letter-spacing: 0.390000015497208px; line-height: 1.5em;">Michael Bosse, </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">Sierra Club deputy national program director, <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/alberta-clipper-11-12-2014.html">in a press release</a>. </span><span style="font-size: 13px; letter-spacing: 0.03em; line-height: 1.5em;">“Enbridge has been allowed to play by their own rules…at the expense of our water, air, and climate.”<br /><br />
Watch the animation created by Mark Fiore for DeSmogBlog in 2012 about Hillary Clinton's State Department Oil Services: </span><br /><object height="420" width="560"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/Mtr1kU0b_Gw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="420" src="//www.youtube.com/v/Mtr1kU0b_Gw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560"></embed></object></p>
<p><span style="font-size:11px;">Photo Credit: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Timothy_Geithner_speaking_at_the_United_States_Treasury.jpg"><em>Wikimedia Commons</em></a></span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5857">Keystone XL</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8672">NEPA</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7693">FERC</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7694">Federal Energy Regulatory Commission</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5869">National Environmental Policy Act</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18901">Christina Lake Project</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18890">Kieran Suckling</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6951">diluted bitumen</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6950">dilbit</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18882">Jeffrey Jones</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/oil-sands">oil sands</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18883">Enbridge Keystone XL Clone</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5420">TransCanada</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14714">Keystone Pipeline System</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18884">U.S. Department of the Treasury</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18885">Timothy Geithner</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15891">Warburg Pincus</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18886">MEG Energy</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12487">alberta clipper</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18887">Alberta Clipper Expansion Project</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14481">Flanagan South</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17582">Seaway Pipeline</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/16942">Enterprise Products Partners</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18888">Condensate Exports</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18861">crude oil export ban</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18889">Oil Re-Exports</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/621">globe and mail</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12094">tar sands exports</a></div></div></div>Fri, 14 Nov 2014 17:59:17 +0000Steve Horn8772 at http://www.desmogblog.comConfirmed: California Aquifers Contaminated With Billions Of Gallons of Fracking Wastewaterhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2014/10/07/central-california-aquifers-contaminated-billions-gallons-fracking-wastewater
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_197928563.jpg?itok=rDldSETR" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><strong>Update 02/11/15: </strong>The problems with California's underground injection control program are far worse than originally reported. It has now been revealed that California regulators with <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/03/california-regulators-allowed-hundreds-oil-industry-wastewater-injection-wells-drilled-aquifers-drinkable-water" target="_blank"><span class="caps">DOGGR</span> permitted hundreds of wastewater injection wells</a> and <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2015/02/11/not-hundreds-thousands-oil-industry-injection-wells-dumping-wastewater-protected-california-aquifers" target="_blank">thousands more wells injecting fluids for “enhanced oil recovery” into aquifers</a> protected under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.<br /><br /><strong>Original post: </strong>After California state regulators <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/07/21/california-orders-emergency-shutdown-fracking-wastewater-injection-sites-over-fears-contaminated-aquifers" target="_blank">shut down 11 fracking wastewater injection wells</a> last July over concerns that the wastewater might have contaminated aquifers used for drinking water and farm irrigation, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> ordered a report within 60 days.<br /><br />
It was revealed yesterday that the California State Water Resources Board has sent a letter to the <span class="caps">EPA</span> confirming that <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/fracking-10-06-2014.html" target="_blank">at least nine of those sites were in fact dumping wastewater</a> contaminated with fracking fluids and other pollutants into aquifers protected by state law and the federal Safe Drinking Water Act.</p>
<p>The letter, a copy of which was <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/fracking-10-06-2014.html" target="_blank">obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity</a>, reveals that nearly 3 billion gallons of wastewater were illegally injected into central California aquifers and that half of the water samples collected at the 8 water supply wells tested near the injection sites have high levels of dangerous chemicals such as arsenic, a known carcinogen that can also weaken the human immune system, and thallium, a toxin used in rat poison.<br /><br />
Timothy Krantz, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Redlands, says these chemicals could pose a serious risk to public health: “The fact that high concentrations are showing up in multiple water wells close to wastewater injection sites raises major concerns about the health and safety of nearby residents.”</p>
<!--break-->
<p>The full extent of the contamination is not yet known. Regulators at the State Water Resources Board said that as many as 19 other injection wells could have been contaminating protected aquifers, and the Central Valley Water Board has so far only tested 8 of the nearly 100 nearby water wells.<br /><br />
Fracking has been accused of <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/01/fracking-making-california-s-drought-worse-say-activists" target="_blank">exacerbating California's epic state-wide drought</a>, but the Central Valley region, which has some of the worst air and water pollution in the state, has borne a disproportionate amount of the impacts from oil companies' increasing use of the controversial oil extraction technique.<br /><br />
News of billions of gallons of fracking wastewater contaminating protected aquifers relied on by residents of the Central Valley for drinking water could not have come at a worse time.<br /><br />
Adding insult to injury, fracking is a water-intensive process, using as much as <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/01/fracking-making-california-s-drought-worse-say-activists" target="_blank">140,000 to 150,000 gallons per frack job every day</a>, permanently removing it from the water cycle.<br /><br />
Hollin Kretzmann, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, says these new revelations prove state regulators have failed to protect Californians and the environment from fracking and called on Governor Jerry Brown to take action now to prevent an even bigger water emergency in drought-stricken California.<br /><br />
“Much more testing is needed to gauge the full extent of water pollution and the threat to public health,” Krezmann says. “But Governor Brown should move quickly to halt fracking to ward off a surge in oil industry wastewater that California simply isn’t prepared to dispose of safely.”</p>
<p style="font-size:9px"><em>Image Credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-197928563/stock-photo-pollution-of-water-chemical-and-biological-contamination-eco-disaster.html?src=sMGtiQ54F16ymFA3-vtRtw-1-29" target="blank">Pollution of Water. Chemical and Biological Contamination. Eco Disaster.</a> by Sinisha Karich / Shutterstock.com</em></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/745">california</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5421">contamination</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1286">oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6180">water</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6550">arsenic</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/18231">thallium</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div></div></div>Tue, 07 Oct 2014 23:05:19 +0000Mike Gaworecki8608 at http://www.desmogblog.comAs Energy Department Announces Methane Measures, Critics Call for Stronger Actionhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/02/energy-department-announces-methane-moves-critics-call-stronger-action
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/shutterstock_134804795.jpg?itok=X3esjgUb" width="200" height="133" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>On Tuesday, the White House <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-says-delays-in-curbing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-may-cost-billions/2014/07/29/8cb27976-168e-11e4-9e3b-7f2f110c6265_story.html">released</a> a report estimating that delaying action on climate change could cause $150 billion a year in damage to the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> economy.</p>
<p>“These costs are not one-time, but are rather incurred year after year because of the permanent damage caused by increased climate change resulting from the delay,” the <a href="http://www.eenews.net/assets/2014/07/29/document_cw_01.pdf">assessment</a> warned.</p>
<p>That same day, President Obama announced moves to help reduce greenhouse gasses. But some critics charge that the President's actions have so far failed to be proportionate to the crisis the White House predicts.</p>
<p>As DeSmog <a href="http://desmogblog.com/2014/07/29/epa-internal-audit-finds-agency-s-flawed-pipeline-oversight-adds-192-million-year-gas-bills-harms-climate">reported</a>, on Tuesday, the Environmental Protection Agency's program on natural gas pipeline leaks came under fire from the <span class="caps">EPA</span>'s own internal watchdog. The <span class="caps">EPA</span> inspector general lambasted the agency for setting up rules that rely heavily on voluntary leak repairs by pipeline companies while turning a blind eye to state policies that allow those companies to simply pass the price of leaking gas to consumers instead of making costly repairs.<br /><br />
The resulting leaks, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> audit concluded, cost consumers over $192 million and the resulting greenhouse gasses each year were equal to putting an addition 2.7 million cars on the road.</p>
<p>On the heels of that report, the <a href="http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060003765">Obama administration announced that it would adjust its methane pollution controls</a> — but the measures they announced fell far short of what some experts argue is necessary to curtail methane's climate hazards. The Department of Energy's new measures include adjustments to its voluntary leak control program and add funding for research into ways to better curb leaks.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>While we applaud the commitments made by <span class="caps">DOE</span>, labor unions, utility groups, and other stakeholders,” Earthworks Policy Director Lauren Pagel <a href="http://www.ogj.com/articles/2014/07/doe-unveils-initiative-to-curb-methane-emissions-from-us-gas-systems.html">told</a> the Oil and Gas Journal, “voluntary measures and new research initiatives don’t adequately protect communities and the climate.”</p>
<!--break-->
<p>In recent years, methane leaks — especially those from the nation's ongoing shale drilling rush — have caught the attention of researchers because of the gas's powerful climate-changing effects, which are at their strongest over a decade or two.<br /><br />
Because methane traps an enormous amount of heat relatively soon after it is released into the atmosphere — 86 times as much as the same amount of carbon dioxide, according to the <span class="caps">UN</span>'s panel of climate change experts — the harm that it does is much more immediate than other greenhouse gasses. And leaks from the natural gas industry are a major source of methane emissions in the <span class="caps">U.S.</span></p>
<p>“Reducing the oil and gas industry's massive methane pollution could help provide the breathing room we need to avoid disastrous climate tipping points,” Shaye Wolf, climate science director at the Center for Biological Diversity, <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/methane-07-29-2014.html">said</a>. “The Obama administration has to start using accurate estimates of methane’s short-term climate effects. But our government also has to take swift action against this dangerously potent greenhouse gas.”</p>
<p>Obama's stance on methane emissions, including the recent Department of Energy announcements, drew protests from some scientists. In a Tuesday <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/climate_law_institute/global_warming_what_how_why/methane/pdfs/Scientist_letter_re_methane_GWP_7-29-14.pdf">letter to Energy Department officials</a> including secretary Ernest Moniz, 21 prominent climate scientists, many of whom have published high-profile papers on methane leaks, called for stronger oversight of emissions from several industry industries, specifically focusing on the oil and gas industry, the agricultural sector, landfills and coal mining.</p>
<p>“[A]ggressive mitigation of methane emissions is essential if the near-term pace of climate change is to be slowed,” the letter warned. “Such a slowing is essential to increase the likelihood of avoiding climatic tipping points and to moderate the intensification of current climate impacts, including Arctic sea-ice loss (which has also been implicated in intensifying extreme weather anomalies), ice sheet melt, permafrost thawing, and declining seasonal snowpack.”</p>
<p>The scientists specifically focused on outdated figures used by federal agencies, calling on the Obama administration to reconsider the way it assesses methane's role in climate change.<br /><br />
“<span class="caps">EPA</span>’s greenhouse gas inventory converts methane emissions to <span class="caps">CO</span>2 equivalents using a seriously outdated value,” the letter said. “Because of this shortcoming, the analysis of emissions and their effects in the Methane Strategy requires re-calculation using the best-available updated [global warming potential] values.”</p>
<p>Still some advocates say that the President's recent moves might be a sign that minds are beginning to change in Washington <span class="caps">D.C.</span><br /><br />
“These rules can be a first step down the road to limit dangerous methane pollution,” Ms. Pagel told the Oil and Gas Journal “and begin to truly shift our energy systems away from an ‘all-of-the-above’ strategy to one that throws the full weight of our resources behind renewable energy.”</p>
<p><span style="font-size:9px;">Photo Credit:</span><a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-134804795/stock-photo-fire-performing-practices-plugging-leaking-methane-gas.html?src=F9VMrLolc6oAWapULqJwwg-1-2"> </a><span style="font-size:9px;"><a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-134804795/stock-photo-fire-performing-practices-plugging-leaking-methane-gas.html?src=F9VMrLolc6oAWapULqJwwg-1-2">Fire performing practices plugging leaking methane gas</a>, via Shutterstock.</span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1907">methane</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14914">leaks</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/epa">EPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7679">doe</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2797">Department of Energy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2702">obama</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12247">Ernest Moniz</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17487">methane strategy</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7084">Climate Change Strategy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17488">all-of-the-above</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11915">greenhouse gasses</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3745">tipping point</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2800">natural gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5565">shale gas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17489">landfills</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2150">agriculture</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/17490">voluntary programs</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/white-house">white house</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10333">Earthworks</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7533">Letter</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/15960">greenhouse gas inventory</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2920">pollution</a></div></div></div>Sat, 02 Aug 2014 14:31:08 +0000Sharon Kelly8356 at http://www.desmogblog.comNew Carbon Rules for Power Plants A Missed Opportunity To Rein in Natural Gas Emissions, Critics Sayhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2014/01/13/new-carbon-limits-power-plants-missed-opportunity-rein-natural-gas-emissions-critics-say
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/chimney.jpg?itok=XGD3fkzq" width="200" height="101" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>One of the linchpins of the Obama administration’s high-stakes <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/share/climate-action-plan">plan</a> to address climate change moved one step closer to implementation this week, as the <span class="caps">EPA</span> <a href="http://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/rulegate.nsf/byRIN/2060-AQ91">officially published</a> proposed new carbon emissions standards for power plants, drawing fire from environmentalists who say the rules for natural gas power plants are too lenient.</p>
<p>The proposed rules cover both natural gas and coal-fired electrical plants, which are responsible for 40 percent of America’s carbon dioxide emissions.</p>
<p>The rules would make it virtually impossible for new coal-fired power plants to be built, unless carbon capture and sequestration technology is used, but sets standards that can be easily achieved by natural gas power plants without using any similar tools.</p>
<p>This has led to an outcry from environmental groups like the Center for Biological Diversity.<br /><br />
“If the <span class="caps">EPA</span> is serious about the climate crisis, it needs to be serious about reducing greenhouse pollution from all power plants — regardless of whether they are fueled by gas or coal,” Bill Snape, the senior counsel for the Center <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/power-plants-01-08-2014.html">said in a statement</a>. “The bottom line is that we can do better.”</p>
<p>The rules for coal plants are not expected to have much direct impact on new power plant construction plans—utilities planned to build very few coal plants even before the <span class="caps">EPA</span> proposed its rule.</p>
<p>But once they are finalized, the standards for new power plants will trigger a key clause of the Clean Air Act, and the <span class="caps">EPA</span> will next be required to create similar carbon dioxide emissions guidelines that would govern the existing 6,500 coal and natural gas power plants nationwide.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>It’s important because it establishes the form that these regulations will take,” John Coequyt, of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/01/09/3139921/epa-carbon-rule-power-plants/">told ThinkProgress</a>.</p>
<p>The <span class="caps">EPA</span> move is part of Mr. Obama’s overall climate strategy, which disappointed many observers who criticize its support of fracking and its <a href="http://earthjustice.org/blog/2013-july/obama-needs-to-step-up-climate-change-plan">underwhelming effectiveness</a>. “The Obama administration is aiming for reductions by 2020,” Brad Plumer wrote in the Washington Post’s Wonkblog <a href="http://http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/03/with-a-bit-of-luck-the-u-s-could-actually-hit-its-2020-climate-change-goals/">earlier this week</a>. “But that's not nearly enough to avert a 2°C rise in temperatures, which is the broader goal.” </p>
<p>Mr. Obama’s climate plan calls for a heavy reliance on natural gas, which produces roughly 50 to 60 percent as much carbon dioxide as coal when burned, to help transition away from coal. But there is strong evidence that natural gas, which is primarily composed of the powerful greenhouse gas methane, may be worse for the climate than coal. The Obama climate plan, in that case, would represent a move from the frying pan into the fire.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>And right now, key infrastructure decisions are being made, as coal power plants nationwide are being retired at an unprecedented pace.</p>
<p>Just nine years ago, coal provided half of the nation’s electricity. By 2013, coal had fallen to 39 percent, Energy Information Administration statistics show, and this trend is likely to grow more pronounced. In certain parts of the country, coal has virtually ceased to play a role in power generation, as the Northeast is currently shuttering its last major coal plant.</p>
<p>In part, the decision about what to replace coal with comes down to costs. In recent years, coal has been more expensive for utilities than natural gas, whose prices plunged during the current shale drilling frenzy, and is also under increasing competition from renewables like wind and solar.</p>
<p>Unlike natural gas, renewables do not have a history of erratic price spikes. Instead, the price of renewables has <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121212134211.htm">slowly</a> <a href="http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/54526.pdf">descended</a> over the past few decades, while the price of natural gas has <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/us/natural-gas-drilling-down-documents-4.html#document/p97/a24473">bounced dramatically</a> even just since the shale boom began to emerge.</p>
<p>Despite these concerns, the President has lent strong support to the natural gas industry. “And again, sometimes there are disputes about natural gas,” Mr. Obama said during a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/06/25/obama-climate-plan-touts-fracking-transition-fuel-doubling-down-methane-risk">June speech</a> announcing his climate plan. “But we should strengthen our position as the top natural gas producer because in the medium-term at least, it can provide not only safe cheap power, but it can only help reduce our carbon emissions.”</p>
<p>But the President’s plan has come under especially heavy fire for failing to adequately account for the climate-changing effect of natural gas leaks, which send vast amounts of methane into the atmosphere. </p>
<p>Instead of cracking down, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> has largely looked the other way and downplayed the amount of methane that leaks, some researchers say. In late November, Harvard researchers <a href="http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2013/11/u-s-methane-emissions-far-exceed-government-estimates/">took the <span class="caps">EPA</span> to task </a>for understating methane leaks from oil and gas drilling and the agricultural industry.<br /><br />
After concluding that methane leaks from those two industries in Texas, Oklahoma and Kanas “have greenhouse gas impacts more than twice that” of official levels, the Harvard researchers criticized the <span class="caps">EPA</span>’s recently decreased estimates for methane leaks, saying that levels should have been raised instead.</p>
<p>These methane leaks may represent the natural gas industry’s biggest greenhouse gas impact. But the <span class="caps">EPA</span>’s new rules relate to an often-overlooked problem with burning natural gas. It may emit less carbon dioxide than coal, but it still gives off significant amounts. <a href="http://www.c2es.org/federal/executive/epa/ghg-standards-for-new-power-plants">Nearly ten percent</a> of total <span class="caps">U.S.</span> carbon dioxide emissions in 2012 came from burning natural gas for electricity.</p>
<p>The newly announced <span class="caps">EPA</span> rules would govern those carbon dioxide emissions. The proposed rules <a href="http://www.c2es.org/federal/executive/epa/ghg-standards-for-new-power-plants">require</a> coal plants to deploy carbon capture and sequestration (<span class="caps">CCS</span>) technologies, but will not impose similar requirements for natural gas-fired plants. The rules have drawn howls from the coal industry, which says that <span class="caps">CCS</span> isn’t yet ready to be deployed (despite the industry’s own long history of advertising <span class="caps">CCS</span> and clean coal in slick ads).<br /><br />
The rules, however, set standards for <span class="caps">CO</span>2 emissions that most natural gas plants already meet, without using any kind of carbon capture.</p>
<p>This has some saying that the Obama administration loaded the dice in favor of the natural gas industry. “Having concluded that <span class="caps">CCS</span> is technically feasible for coal units, <span class="caps">EPA</span> also had to decide whether the same was true for gas units,” attorneys from the law firm McGuireWoods <span class="caps">LLP</span> <a href="http://www.mcguirewoods.com/Client-Resources/Alerts/2013/10/EPA-CO2-NSPS-for-New-Power-Plants.aspx">wrote this fall</a>. “It concluded that it was not, finding, tepidly, that it “was not clear that full or partial capture <span class="caps">CCS</span> is technically feasible'” for natural gas.</p>
<p>This approach shows that the Obama administration is not pushing hard enough to address climate change, some say.</p>
<p>“The <span class="caps">EPA</span>’s lax standards for gas-fired power plants contradict President Obama’s strong statements about the urgent need to cut carbon and other greenhouse pollution,” said Mr. Snape. “The president has rightly said we must find the courage to fight climate change before it’s too late to act. But his administration’s weak natural gas power-plant rules are a huge missed opportunity to fight the pollution that’s warming our planet and pushing us toward climate chaos.”</p>
<p><br /><span style="font-size:9px;">Image credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-97911110/stock-photo-industrial-smoke-from-chimney-on-sky.html?src=csl_recent_image-1">“industrial smoke from chimney on sky”</a> via Shutterstock</span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2800">natural gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1907">methane</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1908">carbon dioxide</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14955">power plant standards</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14956">New Source Performance Standards</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3206">coal plants</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14957">efficiency</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2829">carbon capture and sequestration</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2702">obama</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14958">climate plan</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13752">Cornell Fracking Study</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/913">global warming</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1221">CO2</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14959">coal plant standards</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14960">natural gas plant standards</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13040">Bill Snape</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14961">John Coequyt</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/666">Sierra Club</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8721">Beyond Coal</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14962">Beyond Natural Gas</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14963">WonkBlog</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/767">washington post</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14964">temperature rise</a></div></div></div>Mon, 13 Jan 2014 09:30:00 +0000Sharon Kelly7746 at http://www.desmogblog.comCould California's Shale Oil Boom Be Just a Mirage?http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/11/07/could-california-s-shale-oil-be-just-mirage
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/houseofcards.jpg?itok=JBvmQZ0y" width="200" height="300" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Since the shale rush took off starting in 2005 in Texas, drillers have sprinted from one state to the next, chasing the promise of cheaper, easier, more productive wells. This land rush was fueled by a <a href="http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB120847521878424735">wild spike</a> in natural gas prices that helped make shale gas drilling attractive even though the costs of fracking were high.<br /><br />
As the selling price of natural gas sank from its historic highs in 2008, much of the luster wore off entire regions that had initially captivated investors, like Louisiana’s <a href="http://www.gohaynesvilleshale.com/forum/topics/eia-914-louisiana-production-decline">Haynesville shale</a> or Arkansas’s Fayetteville, <a href="http://swtimes.com/news/communities-feel-impact-fayetteville-shale-drilling-slump">now in decline</a>.<br /><br />
But unlike natural gas prices, oil prices <a href="http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Rate/Historical_Oil_Prices_Table.asp">remain high</a> to this day, and investors and policymakers alike remain dazzled by the heady promise of oil from shale rock. Oil and gas companies have wrung significant amounts of black gold from shale oil plays like Texas’s <a href="http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/070213-662299-texas-eagle-ford-shale-sparks-boom.htm">Eagle Ford</a> and North Dakota’s <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/magazine/north-dakota-went-boom.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0">Bakken</a>.<br /><br />
Shale oil, they say, is the next big thing.<br /><br />
“After years of talking about it, we’re finally poised to control our own energy future,” President Obama said in his most recent <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/12/remarks-president-state-union-address">State of the Union address</a>. “We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years.”<br /><br />
But once again, the reality may be nothing like the hype. Consider California.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>The country’s largest and most closely watched shale oil play is in California’s <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/05/130528-monterey-shale-california-fracking/">Monterey shale</a>. This sprawling geological formation spans 1,750 square miles from Southern to Central California. The Monterey is single-handedly responsible for roughly two thirds of the nation’s total predicted shale oil resources, according to <a href="http://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/usshalegas/pdf/usshaleplays.pdf">federal numbers</a>.</p>
<p>Industry hype made these federal figures pale by comparison by ignoring the limits of technology. The Monterey “has 300 billion barrels of oil in place,” <a href="http://www.epmag.com/Production-Drilling/Monterey-Shale-marvelous-target_60504">claimed</a> Tim Marquez, chief executive of oil and gas company Venoco Inc., which invested heavily in the play, at a 2010 industry conference. The Monterey could hold as much as 400 billion barrels of oil - roughly half as much as Saudi Arabia’s conventional oil – analysts at <span class="caps">IHS</span> Cambridge Energy Research Associates <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/14/news/economy/california-oil-boom/">predicted</a>.<br /><br />
With predictions like these, the value of drilling rights in the Monterey skyrocketed. Oil and gas leases that previously fetched $2 an acre started auctioning off for over $1,000 per acre, the<em> New York Times</em> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/us/vast-oil-reserve-may-now-be-within-reach-and-battle-heats-up.html">reported</a> in February.<br /><br />
A University of Southern California analysis predicted that the impacts on California’s economy would be stunning. The report – which DeSmog revealed had <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/03/14/frackademia-strikes-again-usc-powering-california-study">heavy oil industry ties</a> - forecasts that as many as 2.8 million jobs and $24.6 billion in state and local tax revenue by 2020 could come from Monterey shale oil.<br /><br />
Anti-fracking organizers have also focused their attention on California, warning that the <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/science/fracking-practices-blame-ohio-earthquakes-8C11073601">earthquake-associated</a> process <a href="http://baynature.org/articles/could-fracking-the-monterey-shale-lead-to-the-next-big-one/">should not be adopted</a> near the San Andreas fault, and that the millions of gallons of water required for high-volume hydraulic fracturing could <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/new-energy-paradigm/will-fracking-suck-california-dry-20131020">overwhelm</a> already strapped water resources along the West Coast. A <a href="http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2013/08/13/california-fracking-regulators/">pitched battle</a> is underway over how fracking in California should be regulated.<br /><br />
But as the frenzy has heated up, oil and gas companies have quietly reported disappointing results in the Monterey.<br /><br />
Major oil and gas company Chevron tried drilling the Monterey and didn’t like what it found.<br /><br />
“Based on our drilling results, our view is that the oil has migrated out of the formation and is now found in pockets outside of the Monterey shale,” <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-10/california-s-fracking-bonanza-may-fall-short-of-promise.html">said</a> Kurt Glaubitz, a spokesman for San Ramon, California-based Chevron Corp. (<span class="caps">CVX</span>), the second-biggest <span class="caps">U.S.</span> oil producer. “We don’t believe it’s going to compete for our investment.”<br /><br />
Major oil and gas companies have a reputation for getting burnt by shale plays. Shell’s retiring <span class="caps">CEO</span> Peter Voser <a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/e964a8a6-2c38-11e3-8b20-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=intl#axzz2j8meB73L">told the Financial Times</a> earlier this month that investing $24 billion into North American unconventional oil and gas was one of the biggest regrets of his career. “Unconventionals did not exactly play out as planned,” Mr Voser said, referring partly to a <a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/cf41cc36-fab2-11e2-87b9-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2jdcgNfoR">$2.1 billion write-down</a> Shell took in August related to difficulties turning a profit from shale wells.<br /><br />
Some analysts say that smaller oil and gas exploration companies are more nimble than the majors, and that the success of shale plays should be judged by these companies’ results.</p>
<p>In the Monterey, independents have faced poor results as well.<br /><br />
One such independent, Venoco, has <a href="http://www.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2011/venoco-to-plow-the-monterey-shale-in-2011-vq0113.aspx">tried to coax oil</a> from the Monterey with over 2 dozen wells, investing $76 million in 2012 alone. Venoco held the second-highest amount of acreage in the Monterey, but its early wells <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/11/venoco-idUSSGE69A13P20101011">proved “uneconomic”</a> and it recently moved to <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/05/130528-monterey-shale-california-fracking/">sell off</a> its holdings.<br /><br />
“To date, we have not seen material levels of production or reserves from the program and have, following the completion of the going private transaction, reduced our capital expenditures related to the project,” the company’s most recent annual <span class="caps">SEC</span> filing <a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/e/130415/131302410-k.html">revealed</a>.<br /><br />
That’s a far cry from the <span class="caps">CEO</span>’s 300 billion barrel boast in 2010.<br /><br />
“The Monterey shale was supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, but so far has not lived up to the hype,” Fadel Gheit, an oil and gas analyst at Oppenheimer <span class="amp">&amp;</span> Co. in New York, <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-10/california-s-fracking-bonanza-may-fall-short-of-promise.html">told <em>Bloomberg</em></a>.<br /><br />
Frustrated by poor results from fracking the Monterey shale, some companies have instead tried “acidizing,” or <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/green/article/Acidizing-could-rival-fracking-in-Monterey-Shale-4760329.php">injecting acid into wells</a> to dissolve rocks and release oil, but to no avail. They’ve even explored mixing this acid process with fracking, using a process called an <a href="http://www.martenlaw.com/newsletter/20131007-hydraulic-fracturing-developments-trends">acid-frac</a> that involves injecting hazardous acids into wells at extremely high pressures.<br /><br />
Some state regulators in California have begun to acknowledge the industry’s poor results.<br /><br />
“None of the companies that have tried it so far have had significant success, and it doesn’t appear to be widespread,” Jason Marshall, the California Conservation Department's chief deputy director, told <em><a href="http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-04-09/california-s-fracking-bonanza-may-fall-short-of-promise">Bloomberg Businessweek</a></em>. “It may take an advancement in technology or methodology to unlock the oil production potential of the formation.”<br /><br />
But so far, the feds have barely budged. The <span class="caps">EIA</span> has slightly revised its official estimates for how much gas current technology will allow companies to wrest from the Monterey, down to <a href="http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=7190">13.7 billion barrels</a> from the 15.4 billion predicted in 2011.<br /><br />
Environmentalists remain wary that a technological breakthrough could ultimately lead to widespread drilling. “If and when the oil companies figure out how to exploit that shale oil, California could be transformed almost overnight,” Kassie Siegel, a lawyer at the Center for Biological Diversity, <a href="http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/nation-world/article/Vast-oil-reserve-may-be-within-reach-and-battle-4247712.php">told</a> the <em>New York Times</em>.<br /><br />
Relatively little attention has been paid to operators' actual results, however. Widespread hype has left policymakers focused on shale prospects. “The fossil fuel deposits in California are incredible, the potential is extraordinary,” the state’s governor, Jerry Brown, <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/14/us-california-brown-fracking-idUSBRE92D04320130314">said</a> in March.<br /><br />
Renewable energy sources like wind and solar have had more predictable results, but lack the gold fever that the potential for an oil rush can unleash.<br /><br />
And indeed, many in California remain entranced by the prospect of the Monterey’s fossil fuels.<br /><br />
“You can’t let a few dry holes discourage the whole thing,” <a href="http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/19040101_Vast_oil_reserve_may_be_within_reach_and_battle_heats_up.html">said</a> Neil Ormond, the president of Petroleum Land Management, a company based in Clovis, Calif, “because if you find oil, you make money.”</p>
<p><span style="font-size:9px;">Photo Credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-145742675/stock-photo-falling-house-of-cards-together-as-a-symbol-for-collapse.html?src=NMFV-HnK7bWdXnYIeJt_ow-1-11"><em>Falling House of Cards Together as Symbol for Collapse</em></a>, via Shutterstock.</span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5565">shale gas</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7277">shale oil</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8481">boom</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8482">bust</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10467">Monterey Shale</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8653">Bakken</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8728">Eagle Ford</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14275">over-estimated</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14276">oil rush</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14277">Venoco</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1268">shell</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/chevron">chevron</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14278">land rush</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14279">drillers</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14280">price spike</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14281">ponzi</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7349">Haynesville Shale</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7760">Fayetteville Shale</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4754">President Obama</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/745">california</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14282">Tim Marquez</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14283">IHS CERA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14284">IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13992">University of Southern California</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14285">industry-tied</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/10232">Frackademia</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4174">jobs</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9546">taxes</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14286">promises</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6990">earthquakes</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14287">water strain</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14288">water use</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14289">arid west</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14290">biggest regret</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14291">Peter Voser</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14292">SEC filings</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14293">write-downs</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14294">Fadel Gheit</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14295">Oppenheimer &amp; Co</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14296">acidizing</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14297">acid-frac</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14298">California Conservation Department</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14299">Jason Marshall</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2573">EIA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5587">energy information administration</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2797">Department of Energy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12880">jerry brown</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6351">shale</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6443">solar</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5579">Wind</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/9142">renewables</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14300">gold fever</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14301">dry holes</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/14302">Petroleum Land Management</a></div></div></div>Thu, 07 Nov 2013 17:00:00 +0000Sharon Kelly7600 at http://www.desmogblog.comEnergy Secretary Ernest Moniz Relies on Dubious Coal Tech for Obama Climate Strategyhttp://www.desmogblog.com/2013/06/28/obama-s-energy-czar-continues-back-dubious-coal-technology-part-climate-strategy
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/coal%20plant.jpg?itok=MVN0PoO6" width="200" height="134" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>The key takeaway from President Obama's major climate change announcement this week was his intent to batten down on coal. But if history is any indication, the man Mr. Obama selected to run the Department of Energy may have different plans.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/12247">Ernest J. Moniz</a> has a long history of supporting coal-powered electricity, staking his arguments in favor of coal on a technology that remains entirely unproven: carbon capture and sequestration (<span class="caps">CCS</span>).<br /><br />
Mr. Moniz will be in a uniquely influential position when it comes to confronting these problems. President Obama announced that he would rely on executive agencies instead of Congress, so Mr. Moniz's Energy Department will play a crucial role in determining precisely how Obama’s strategy is administered. <br /><br />
The day after Obama's speech, Moniz <a href="http://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/HHRG-113-SY-WState-EMoniz-20130617.pdf">told Congress</a> “the President advocates an all-of-the-above energy strategy and I am very much in tune with this.”<br /><br />
What’s wrong with an all-of-the-above strategy? It extends reliance on fossil fuels, at a time when scientists warn that <a href="http://http://capitalinstitute.org/blog/big-choice-0">we can only burn</a> twenty percent of current reserves before the world tips past the crucial 2 degree Celsius point. Beyond <a href="http://www.livescience.com/10325-living-warmer-2-degrees-change-earth.html">two degrees</a>, some of the most devastating impacts of global warming will be felt. Keep in mind that, if all of the world’s coal is burned, global temperatures could rise by a jaw-dropping 15 degrees Celsius, a study published in the prestigious journal Nature last year <a href="http://m.ibtimes.co.uk/report-coal-natural-gas-more-harmful-environment-301797.html">concluded</a>.</p>
<p>The stakes, when it comes to controlling American greenhouse gas emissions, are huge.</p>
<!--break-->
<p>In May, carbon dioxide levels in the Earth’s atmosphere reached <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/may/14/record-400ppm-co2-carbon-emissions">400 parts per million</a> – the highest level of carbon dioxide ever recorded in human history. Last year, the continental <span class="caps">U.S.</span> experienced its hottest year on record, and the <span class="caps">NRDC</span> estimates that climate-related disasters like crop loss, wildfires and floods <a href="http://www.propertycasualty360.com/2013/05/23/nrdc-insurers-running-from-climate-change-risks-in">cost the nation</a> roughly $140 billion last year alone, with much of the tab picked up by taxpayers.<br /><br />
Power plants are the single largest source of American carbon dioxide emissions, accounting for a third of the nation’s total greenhouse gasses. So focusing on power plants is key if emissions are to be reduced.</p>
<p>Coal currently supplies about 40 percent of American electricity, according to <a href="http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=electricity_in_the_united_states"><span class="caps">EIA</span> statistics</a>, down from fifty percent in 2005. Coal’s decline comes as natural gas from fracking (which has its own <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/06/25/obama-climate-plan-touts-fracking-transition-fuel-doubling-down-methane-risk">worrisome climate impacts</a>, measured in methane rather than carbon dioxide), wind and solar, have risen in their share of the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> electric portfolio. Since the beginning of 2010, <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/06/130625-obama-unveils-climate-change-strategy/">145 coal-fired power plants</a> announced plans to retire.</p>
<p>But the Department of Energy is focused not on retiring more of these plants, pinning its hopes instead on developing new technologies to make coal cleaner. <a href="http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ccs/index.html">The plan</a> in rough form, involves collecting carbon dioxide emitted by power plants and burying it, forever, underground.<br /><br />
If that sounds like a heck of a challenge, that’s because it is.<br /><br />
There’s not a single large commercially-operating carbon sequestration plant <a href="http://High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut &amp; paste the article. See our Ts&amp;Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8717b060-2fd3-11e2-891b-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz2XXCQyuHa The end result is that governments have committed $25bn globally to carbon capture projects in the last four years without managing to produce a single large commercially operating CCS power plant anywhere in the world.">anywhere in the world</a>.</p>
<p>That's despite over $25 billion in government subsidies worldwide from 2008 to 2012.<br /><br />
Nevertheless, Mr. Moniz told Congress that “the Administration has already committed about $6 billion to [carbon capture and sequestration] demonstrations, and success of the forthcoming projects will be a critical step toward meeting the President’s climate goals.”<br /><br />
The $8 billion in total subsidies adds up to more than the wind and solar industries combined receive – and those are industries that have proven themselves to be commercially viable.<br /><br />
Undaunted, Moniz <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/us/politics/energy-secretary-optimistic-on-obamas-plan-to-reduce-emissions.html?_r=0">told</a> <em>The New York Times</em> on Thursday that carbon capture and sequestration was a vital part of the country’s climate change strategy. He called for <span class="caps">CCS</span> to be commercialized first for coal-fired power plants. He added that natural gas’ carbon emissions, though half those of coal, are still too high to meet Obama’s long-term goal of slashing emissions 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050 – so he called for the same speculative technology to resolve that problem as well.<br /><br />
The transition to an electric industry that captures its greenhouse gasses instead of releasing them into the atmosphere makes the challenges associated with developing renewables like wind and solar look easy in comparison.</p>
<div id="stcpDiv" style="position: absolute; top: -1999px; left: -1988px;">
Professor Vaclav Smil, author of the “Energy Myths and Realities: Bringing Science to the Energy Policy Debate” - See more at: <a href="http://www.ecopedia.com/environment/will-carbon-sequestration-solve-climate-change/#sthash.tbFFsmF9.dpuf">http://www.ecopedia.com/environment/will-carbon-sequestration-solve-clim...</a></div>
<p>Professor Vaclav Smil, author of “Energy Myths and Realities: Bringing Science to the Energy Policy Debate” has <a href="http://www.ecopedia.com/environment/will-carbon-sequestration-solve-climate-change/">calculated</a> that to sequester just a fifth of current carbon dioxide emissions:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“… we would have to create an entirely new worldwide absorption-gathering-compression-transportation- storage industry whose annual throughput would have to be about 70 percent larger than the annual volume now handled by the global crude oil industry whose immense infrastructure of wells, pipelines, compressor stations and storages took generations to build.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Carbon capture is also grossly inefficient. “By some estimates, 40 percent of the energy generated has to go to the carbon capture and sequestration process,” Josh Galperin, associate director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/25/4463116/president-obamas-plan-fix-climate-change-flawed-say-experts">said</a> after the climate strategy was released. DeSmog’s <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/06/26/obama-s-faith-carbon-capture-technicolor-dream">Kevin Grandia describes</a> some further technical hurdles that carbon sequestration has yet to overcome.</p>
<p>In a key indication of how shaky the science is behind carbon sequestration, not even the World Bank will fund it. Concerns about climate change led the Bank to restrict its financial support for coal projects except in “rare circumstances,” a draft strategy <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-26/world-bank-to-limit-coal-power-financing-to-rare-circumstances.html">leaked</a> to the press earlier this week indicates. In a glaring omission, the strategy says nothing about carbon capture and sequestration as an alternative.<br /><br />
None of this seems to matter to Mr. Moniz, whose support of the coal industry and faith in sequestration has been longstanding.<br /><br />
A 2009 report he helped produce focused on how to reduce <span class="caps">CO</span>2 from coal plants, touting the potential for so-called “clean coal.” <br /><br />
“It's cheap,” he <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=future-of-clean-coal-tied-to-success-of-carbon-capture-and-storage">told </a>Scientific American when the report was released, “there's lots of it and there's lots of it in places with high demand, namely the U.S., China and India.”<br /><br />
In 2007, Moniz co-authored an <span class="caps">MIT</span> report titled “The Future of Coal” that <a href="http://web.mit.edu/coal/">aimed to examine</a> “how the world can continue to use coal, an abundant and inexpensive fuel, in a way that mitigates, instead of worsens, the global warming crisis.”<br /><br />
Moniz’s faith in carbon sequestration has remained unshaken up to the present day.<br /><br />
“It's not going to happen tomorrow, but I believe in this decade we will have demonstrated the viability of large-scale storage” of carbon-dioxide from industrial operations, he <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ap-interview-energy-secy-moniz-says-8-billon-loan-program-will-help-coal-industry-survive/2013/06/27/ff8ff0f6-df65-11e2-8cf3-35c1113cfcc5_story.html">told the Associated Press</a> on Thursday. “The president made clear that we anticipate that coal and other fossil fuels are going to play a significant role for quite some time on the way to a very low carbon economy,” he added.<br /><br />
Meanwhile, broader concerns about the President's climate plans remain.<br /><br />
“We’re happy to see the president finally addressing climate change” <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2013/climate-plan-06-25-2013.html">said Bill Snape</a>, senior counsel for the Center for Biological Diversity, “but the plain truth is that what he’s proposing isn’t big enough, and doesn’t move fast enough, to match the terrifying magnitude of the climate crisis.”</p>
<p>And if the clean coal technology Mr. Moniz is counting on doesn't pan out, prospects may be even dimmer.</p>
<p><span style="font-size:8px;">Image credit: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&amp;search_source=search_form&amp;version=llv1&amp;anyorall=all&amp;safesearch=1&amp;searchterm=coal+plant&amp;search_group=#id=106399886&amp;src=PMkLRbKVfXtko_3RPf-2uQ-1-6">Coal plant</a> via Shutterstock.</span></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/662">coal</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2829">carbon capture and sequestration</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2831">ccs</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/12247">Ernest Moniz</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2797">Department of Energy</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13039">Obama&#039;s climate strategy</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13040">Bill Snape</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/13041">The Future of Coal</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/world-bank">World Bank</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2832">coal industry</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4245">carbon dioxide emissions</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/11915">greenhouse gasses</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/1907">methane</a></div></div></div>Fri, 28 Jun 2013 21:21:42 +0000Sharon Kelly7290 at http://www.desmogblog.comDocuments Reveal USDA Risking Lawsuits by Ignoring Own Staff On Fracking Mortgages Reviewhttp://www.desmogblog.com/documents-reveal-usda-risking-lawsuits-ignoring-own-staff-fracking-mortgages-review
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/usda.png?itok=xe49zcl7" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>A major storm is brewing over the <span class="caps">USDA</span>’s sudden about-face on fracking and environmental laws. On Tuesday, the head of the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Department of Agriculture pulled a 180-degree U-turn and decided to reverse the call made by his staff specialists, who advised that the agency immediately stop giving special exemptions from environmental laws to people applying for federal mortgages on properties with oil and gas leases.<br /><br />
Now, environmentalists, members of Congress, and transparency groups are saying that something seems amiss and they are looking for answers.</p>
<p>It all started on Monday when <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/us/drilling-property-mortgages-may-get-closer-look-from-agriculture-dept.html?pagewanted=all"><em>The New York Times</em> ran a story</a> with emails showing that the <span class="caps">USDA</span> planned to tell its $165 billion dollar mortgage program to stop financing properties with drilling leases until an environmental review of the impact of drilling and fracking on homes backed by the agency could be completed.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>The proposal by the Agriculture Department, which has signaled its intention in e-mails to Congress and landowners, reflects a growing concern that lending to owners of properties with drilling leases might violate the <a href="http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/nepa/nepaeqia.htm">National Environmental Policy Act</a>, known as <span class="caps">NEPA</span>, which requires environmental reviews before federal money is spent. Because that law covers all federal agencies, the department’s move raises questions about litigation risks for other agencies, legal experts said,” the Times story explained.</p>
<p>DeSmogBlog has obtained many of the emails and they make very clear that the staff specialists, whose job it is to interpret laws like <span class="caps">NEPA</span>, believe that environmental reviews are legally required and that the agency is vulnerable to litigation if it gives these mortgages a pass, called a “categorical exclusion.”</p>
<!--break-->
<p>The emails come from staff specialists in the agency’s New York office as well as from headquarters.</p>
<p>One from a Congressional liaison, sent to members of Congress on March 8, said:</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>The level of <span class="caps">NEPA</span> review known as a Categorical Exclusion (<span class="caps">CE</span>) streamlines the <span class="caps">NEPA</span> process for those actions that are so routine and harmless in nature that no further documentation or analysis is required.”</p>
<p>But fracking is hardly “routine” or “harmless”, the liaison added in the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/us/drilling-property-mortgages-may-get-closer-look-from-agriculture-dept.html">email quoted by <em>The New York Times</em></a>.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>There is substantial controversy over the extent, range, and issues associated with hydraulic fracturing (fracking) for gas in the <span class="caps">NE</span> region of the U.S.,” the liaison wrote. “Approval of such leases would allow for a number of potential impacts to possibly occur which would need to be analyzed in a <span class="caps">NEPA</span> document that would be reviewed by the public for sufficiency.”</p>
<h3>
Why should anyone care about this?</h3>
<p>First of all, the situation speaks to a larger trend. The specialists on the front lines came to one conclusion about what the science and law requires. The political appointees at upper ranks decided that such policy does not fit with the current agenda to promote drilling, so they went the opposite way.</p>
<p>But the review being called for by <span class="caps">USDA</span> staff also makes common sense. <span class="caps">NEPA</span>, sometimes called the magna carta of environmental laws because it is so fundamental and powerful, requires government agencies to understand the environmental impacts of decisions before taking action.</p>
<p>If a full environmental review under <span class="caps">NEPA</span> is done, the government would not only need to study the full range of fracking’s environmental impacts, but the public can weigh in on the adequacy of the review. If corners are cut, citizens can sue. And that’s exactly what so scares the Obama administration.</p>
<p>The pressure on the <span class="caps">USDA</span> to reverse the recommendation of its legal experts began almost immediately after the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/us/drilling-property-mortgages-may-get-closer-look-from-agriculture-dept.html?pagewanted=all"><span class="caps">NY</span> Times report</a>.</p>
<p>For example, Rep. Dan Boren (D-<span class="caps">OK</span>) immediately sent a <a href="http://www.house.gov/list/press/ok02_boren/2012_03_19_USDA_loans.html">letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack</a>, protesting against a full <span class="caps">NEPA</span> review.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Not only would an environmental review harm the individuals that need the loans the most, it would also be detrimental to our nation’s progress towards energy independence,” he wrote. “If we make potential home owners choose between getting a home loan to keep their house or maintaining a mineral lease, viable sources of oil and gas may become less accessible.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/us/politics/dan-boren-oklahoma-lawmaker-shares-in-gas-field-bounty.html">Rep. Boren, who has leased his own land for hundreds of thousands of dollars</a> and happens to be the son of Continental Resources board member David Boren, kept the pressure high.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Our economy is in jeopardy and now is not the time to spend when it is unnecessary,” he wrote, referring to the cost of conducting the environmental reviews that <span class="caps">NEPA</span> requires.</p>
<p>Indeed, Sec. Vilsack’s office has attempted to disavow the clear counsel from his frontline offices and experts.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>The information provided to Congressional offices on March 8, 2012 was premature and does not reflect past, current or future practices of the department,” Mr. Vilsack announced yesterday, adding that he would immediately authorize an Administrative Notice “reaffirming” that rural housing loans are exempt from full <span class="caps">NEPA</span> reviews.</p>
<h3>
<span class="caps">USDA</span> Reversal Triggers Fierce Reactions</h3>
<p>On Tuesday, Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-<span class="caps">MA</span>), Ranking Member of the Committee on Natural Resources, sent a <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/MarkeytoCEQ.pdf">letter [<span class="caps">PDF</span>]</a> to the <a href="http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/">Council on Environmental Quality (<span class="caps">CEQ</span>)</a>, the part of the White House that is responsible for overseeing <span class="caps">NEPA</span>, requesting information about how the administration plans to handle fracking and mortgages.</p>
<p>Many agencies, not just the <span class="caps">USDA</span>, issue or back mortgages, Rep. Markey explained, so he formally requested a full environmental review to protect taxpayers not only from being sued for failing to follow <span class="caps">NEPA</span>, but also from being liable for environmental damage from drilling on mortgaged lands.<br /><br />
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-<span class="caps">NY</span>) called on the <span class="caps">USDA</span> to pay close attention to the views of their experts. “There are many cases where these operations have contaminated water supplies and significantly downgraded air quality,” Rep. Hinchey said. “It is critically important that the appropriate federal agencies, including <span class="caps">USDA</span>, do everything they can to prevent these things from happening again.”</p>
<p>The Center for Biological Diversity (<span class="caps">CBD</span>), an environmental group known for conducting aggressive litigation, said in interviews that it was considering filing lawsuits.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/CBD NEPA Letter 3 20 12.pdf"><span class="caps">CBD</span> sent a letter [<span class="caps">PDF</span>]</a> to the <span class="caps">USDA</span>, Federal Housing Administration, Veterans Administration, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency (which oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), putting them on notice that their mortgage lending policies were in clear violation of <span class="caps">NEPA</span>.</p>
<p>The letter demanded that the agencies immediately conduct a legal review. It also called for the agencies to stop granting categorical exclusions to these properties and to conduct audits to determine how many categorical exclusions have already been granted for properties leased for drilling.</p>
<p>Good government groups also swung into action.</p>
<p>Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (<span class="caps">PEER</span>) which specializes in whistleblower and open-records litigation, is hitting <span class="caps">USDA</span> with a broad Freedom of Information Act (<span class="caps">FOIA</span>) request.<br /><br /><span class="caps">PEER</span> is asking <span class="caps">USDA</span> to release a series of documents that may shed light on pressure that the White House may have put on the <span class="caps">USDA</span> to reverse the view of agency staff and instead continue granting categorical exclusions. It also seeks documents between elected officials and the agency about their decisions.</p>
<p>Wenonah Hauter, the executive director of Food and Water Watch described the reversal by <span class="caps">USDA</span> as “<a href="http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/pressreleases/obama-administration-sacrificing-taxpayers-and-rural-america-to-oil-and-gas-industry-profits/">the antithesis of good public policy</a>”.</p>
<p><span class="dquo">“</span>Throughout the rancorous debate on fracking, the Obama Administration has signaled it will put the interests of the oil and gas industry ahead of the welfare of rural communities and <span class="caps">U.S.</span> taxpayers,” she said.<br /><br />
“It is embarrassing for Secretary Vilsack, who has been an outspoken advocate for renewable energy and for preserving the quality of life in rural America, to now do the Obama administration’s bidding and prevent environmental reviews that could protect the water and air resources of rural communities.”</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-upload field-type-file field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><table class="sticky-enabled">
<thead><tr><th>Attachment</th><th>Size</th> </tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd"><td><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/CBD%20NEPA%20Letter%203%2020%2012.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=50675" title="CBD NEPA Letter 3 20 12.pdf">CBD NEPA Letter 3 20 12.pdf</a></span></td><td>49.49 KB</td> </tr>
<tr class="even"><td><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/MarkeytoCEQ.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=2281340" title="MarkeytoCEQ.pdf">MarkeytoCEQ.pdf</a></span></td><td>2.18 MB</td> </tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/690">new york times</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3844">Obama administration</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4150">Ed Markey</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5133">fracking</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/5137">hydraulic fracturing</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6133">gas drilling</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/6847">PEER</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/7869">dan boren</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8483">mortgages</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8668">USDA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8669">Tom Vilsack</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8670">Wenonah Hauter</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8671">fracking mortgages</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8672">NEPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8673">property values fracking</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8674">council on environmental quality (CEQ)</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/8675">Nancy Sutley</a></div></div></div>Wed, 21 Mar 2012 19:30:35 +0000Brendan DeMelle6145 at http://www.desmogblog.comThe Oceans v. EPAhttp://www.desmogblog.com/oceans-v-epa
<div class="field field-name-field-bimage field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><img src="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/styles/blog_teaser/public/blogimages/oceanph-caldera-wickett_1.jpg?itok=fqyLe9Bb" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p><span class="dquo">“</span>Out of sight, out of mind,” is a pithy saying that aptly sums up the attitude most industrialized countries have toward ocean acidification. While there has been much (justified) hand-wringing about the terrestrial impacts of climate change, policymakers have largely ignored the threats posed by acidic seas – which are considerable.</p>
<p>For one, ocean acidification could wipe out a significant fraction of the world’s coral reefs – perhaps even all of them – by mid-century if we don’t curb our emissions. In late 2007, <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2007-12-13-coral-reefs_N.htm">17 marine biologists co-authored a review article in <em>Science</em></a> in which they warned that, under a worst-case emissions scenario (450 – 500 ppm and a temperature increase larger than 5.4°C), all reefs could disappear, taking up to <em>half</em> of all marine life with them.<!--break--> <br />Also, by inhibiting the formation of calcium carbonate shells or skeletons in phytoplankton, depressed pH levels would significantly reduce the oceans’ ability to act as a sink for carbon dioxide.</p>
<p>Despite the growing clamor among scientists, no steps have yet been taken to make ocean acidification a key component of future climate negotiations. At <a href="http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=46869">last week’s World Oceans Conference</a> in Manado, Indonesia, delegates from 76 countries met to discuss the deplorable state of ocean and coastal areas and to draft a resolution urging the international community to put ocean acidification on the agenda of December’s Copenhagen climate meeting.</p>
<p>Many of these delegates represented islands and developing countries, which have the most to lose from rising sea levels and acidic waters. Couple these problems with other anthropogenic impacts, including pollution, coastal development and overfishing, and you have the makings of an imminent catastrophe.</p>
<p>The election of the pro-environment Obama administration gave many hope that the United States would reclaim the mantle of global leadership and push for an ambitious successor to the Kyoto Protocol. In particular, the appointment of <a href="http://lucile.science.oregonstate.edu/lubchenco/Pages/AboutJane/Biography.cfm">Jane Lubchenco</a>, a renowned marine ecologist, as President Obama’s <span class="caps">NOAA</span> administrator heartened many scientists concerned about the lack of focus on the oceans.</p>
<p>The administration’s environmental credentials are about to be put to the test, thanks to a new lawsuit filed last Friday by the Tucson, Arizona, based <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/index.html">Center for Biological Diversity</a>. The non-profit group is <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/mnCarbonEmissions/idUS413399443920090515">suing the <span class="caps">EPA</span></a> over its failure to acknowledge the impacts of ocean acidification on Washington’s coastal waters.</p>
<p>More specifically, it wants the <span class="caps">EPA</span> to add any waters that fail to meet federal water quality standards because of ocean acidification to its impaired list if a state does not act. When a water body is added to the list, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> or the state has to set limits on the amount of pollutants entering the system; in this case, it would mean reducing emission production.</p>
<p>Billed as the first case to tackle ocean acidification, it will test whether the reach of the Clean Water Act, under whose auspices the lawsuit was brought, extends to the regulation of carbon dioxide as a pollutant. Current <span class="caps">EPA</span> guidelines dictate that waters be placed on the impaired list if their pH deviates by 0.2 or more units.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7745714.stm">report published last year in the <em>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</em></a> determined that the pH of Washington’s coastal waters had dropped by more than 0.2 units since 2000. Despite this, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> did not add Washington’s waters to its impaired list when it approved the state’s list earlier this year. The <span class="caps">CBD</span> had previously raised concerns during the list’s public comment period.</p>
<p>In recent months, the <span class="caps">EPA</span> has shown signs that it may be warming to the <span class="caps">CBD</span>’s position, initiating a public process to review its water quality criteria and invoking the Act to request more data on ocean acidification. Therefore, there is a good chance the lawsuit could force the <span class="caps">EPA</span>’s hand a bit and give the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> its first regulations for ocean acidification.</p></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/epa">EPA</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/913">global warming</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/948">washington</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3844">Obama administration</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/3930">Lisa Jackson</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4000">ocean acidification</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/4344">pH</a></div></div></div>Wed, 20 May 2009 21:46:51 +0000Jeremy Jacquot3917 at http://www.desmogblog.comCourt orders Bush administration to prepare global-warming documentshttp://www.desmogblog.com/court-orders-bush-administration-to-prepare-global-warming-documents
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"> <p>Environmentalists sued to force the Bush administration to comply with the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Global Change Research Act of 1990, which requires the <span class="caps">U.S.</span> Climate Change Science Program to prepare a National Assessment every four years to take into account all the latest federal climate-change research. The act also <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/swcbd/press/global-warming-08-21-2007.html">requires regular updates of a Research Plan </a> that guides all federal climate research.</p><p>The lawsuit was brought by the Center for Biological Diversity, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth. <br /></p> <p>The last National Assessment was prepared by the Clinton administration in late 2000, and was not updated in 2004 as required by law. An updated Research Plan, required in 2006, also has not been produced.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span class="caps">U.S.</span> District Court Judge Saundra Armstrong ordered the Bush administration to prepare a draft of a new Research Plan by March 1, 2008, a final plan 90 days later, and an updated National Assessment by May 31, 2008.</p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-taxonomy-vocabulary-14 field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/friends-of-the-earth">Friends of the Earth</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/bush-administration">Bush Administration</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/tags/greenpeace">greenpeace</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/tags/white-house">white house</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/913">global warming</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/939">climate change</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/988">u.s.</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2032">Clinton administration</a></div><div class="field-item even"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2033">Center for Biological Diversity</a></div><div class="field-item odd"><a href="/directory/vocabulary/2034">Saundra Armstrong</a></div></div></div>Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:32:39 +0000Bill Miller2169 at http://www.desmogblog.com